Batshit crazy is what losers like gatomontes99 call people when he has BUPKIS for arguments

[robosmith]

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election

Quote

The Trump campaign’s interactions with Russian intelligence services during the 2016 presidential election posed a “grave” counterintelligence threat, a Senate panel concluded Tuesday as it detailed how associates of Donald Trump had regular contact with Russians and expected to benefit from the Kremlin’s help.

The nearly 1,000-page report, the fifth and final one from the Republican-led Senate intelligence committee on the Russia investigation, details how Russia launched an aggressive effort to interfere in the election on Trump’s behalf. It says the Trump campaign chairman had regular contact with a Russian intelligence officer and says other Trump associates were eager to exploit the Kremlin’s aid, particularly by maximizing the impact of the disclosure of Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence officers.

AKA clear findings of COLLUSION between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence, as detailed in Chapters 4-6 of the full committee report.

(u)report

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (.gov)

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov › documents

 

 

PDF

 

Aug 18, 2020 — ... Russia interfered in .the 2016 U.S. election. vi. COMMITTEE SENSITIVE-RUSSIA INVESTIGATION ONLY. Page 7. COMMITTEE SENSITIVE - RUSSIA ...

966 pages

But gatomontes99 pretends that one paragraph authored by 5 RepubliCON Senators which was NOT agreed to by other committee members like the above conclusions, takes precedence and in desperation calls posters who point that out "batshit crazy."

When HE'S LOSING THE DEBATE, it is gatomontes99 who goes batshit crazy.

Edited September 28, 2024 by robosmith

[robosmith]

Chapter 4 page 47

Quote

4. (U) Manafort's Activities from 2014 until Joining the Trump Campaign
(U) Issues related to Manafort's historical involvement with Deripaska and the PoR
continued through Manafort's entry into the Trump Campaign in 2016. These connections
generally focused on business disputes and efforts to collect debts.

Gates recalled that "pretty much all" of the Cyprus entities were used for PoR work. FBI, FD-302,
Gates 1/29/2018. These entities were often organized by which oligarchs were funding payments to the Cypriot
accounts. For example, Bletilla Ventures Limited in Cyprus was affiliated with payments related to Lyovochkin.
FBI, FD-302, Gates 1/31/2018. Over time, Manafort put Kilimnik in control of the majority ofManafort-related
accounts in Cyprus. FBI, FD-302, Gates 1/30/2018. Gates did not know why Kilimnik was in charge .of these
accounts, but understood that Manafort wanted it that way. Ibid. These accounts included Global Highway Limited
and Lucicle Consultants Limited. ·

(U) After Yanuk:ovych fled Ukraine for Russia in 2014, the PoR effectively dissolved.
Manafort, however, maintained close connections to the former PoR officials who remained in
Ukraine. The remnants of the PoR consolidated into a new political party, the Opposition Bloc
(OB). The OB was made up of a variety of pro-Russia politicians and former-PoR figures,
causing it to be viewed as a rebranded version of the PoR.206 Lyovochkin, Yanuk:ovych's former
chief of staff, helped lead the consolidation of the OB with the backing of Akhmetov,
Yanukovych's longtime sponsor.207
·
(U) Manafort, along with Gates and Kilimnik, worked to support the newly formed OB.
According to Patten, while Manafort was very expensive, Akhmetov viewed Manafort as a
"lucky charm," and thus continued to pay him for consulting work.208 Manafort remained the
main political advisor to the OB, but Manafort's involvement was not at the same level as its ·
previous peak under Yanukovych, likely due to the OB's own reduced political standing.209
According to Gates, DMP's work for the PoR in 2014 was primarily related to a "micro-targeting
campaign."210 Manafort's continued involvement in Ukraine was noted by other observers at the
time. For example, an American IRI employee who attended a meeting with OB representatives
at the time noted that the OB representatives "did an EXCELLENT job pushing all the right
buttons." The observer further noted:
Well, no wonder they performed well - Paul Manafort is their consultant, residual
consultant.from Yanukovych days. He was in our hotel with former /RI employee
Konstantin Klimenko {sic} and is on my flight today[] You would have thought
Manafort et al would have realized what a bullet they dodged when Yanukovych
left but I guess the contracts are too lucrative. 211
(U) Kilimnik remained deeply involved in Manafort's efforts to assist the OB. Kilimnik
ostensibly ran the Kyiv office ofManafort's firm, DMP. However, Kilimnik appeared to have
significant access within the OB independent ofManafort.212 Kilimnik's ultimate source of
funding and authority during this time also remains unclear. Patten, whom Kilimnik recruited to
206 (U) For example, the American IRI employee observed that the OB was in fact a "Party of Regions (PoR) re-
. do." Email, Garrett to Green and Van Rest, October 29, 2014 (IRI Production).

come to Ukraine in 2014 to assist the OB and who reported to Kilimnik, recalled that although
Kilimnik worked from an office in Manafort's firm in Ky"iv, it was unclear to Patten whether
Lyovochkin or Manafort was paying Kilimnik.213 Patten recalled one occasion during his first
meeting with Manafort in Kyiv where Manafort had spoken highly of Kilimnik and called
Kilimnik a "powerful little dude."214
(U) While the scale ofManafort's work in Ukraine began to decline, Manafort
nonetheless stayed involved in Ukraine matters in thelead-up to his March 2016 entry into the
Trump Campaign. For example, a November 19, 2015 email from an associate of Gates relayed
that Manafort and Gates were actively involved in the "Mariupol race on 11/29," a likely
reference to a second round of elections in Mariupol on November 29, 2015.215 The same email
also relayed Oates's perspective on the latest political developments on this race and Ukrainian·
politics more generally, suggesting an active engagement.216 Travel records suggest_Manafort

 

[robosmith]

Chapter 5 page 53

Quote

5. (U) Manafort's Activities While Serving on the Trump Campaign
i. (U) Manafort's Entry into the Trump Campaign
(U) At least as early as January 2016, Manafort was actively seeking a position on the
Trump Campaign. Manafort explained to Gates-who was still working for Manafort' s firm,
despite a lack of clients-that working for the Trump Campaign would be "good for business"
and a·potential way for Manafort's firm to be paid for work done in Ukraine for which they were
owed.248 Manafort used contacts with Roger Stone and Tom Barrack, both of whom were
longtime associates of Trump, to lobby for a position on the Trump Campaign.
(U) On January 30, 2016, during a meeting with Barrack, Manafort requested Barrack's
help in obtaining a position on the Trump Campaign.249 Prior to the January outreach, Barrack
had not heard from Manafort for an extended period.250 Barrack agreed to help Manafort
approach Trump in an effort to obtain a position for Manafort on the Trump Campaign.251
. (U) By February 25, 2016, Barrack had spoken to Trump twice about the possibility of
Manafort joining the Campaign.252 According to Barrack, Trump initially was not interested in
the idea of hiring Manafort because Trump closely associated Manafort with Roger Stone, whom
Barrack described as having a "love-hate" relationship with Trump.253 Despite this, Manafort
requested that Barrack continue to lobby Trump on his behalf.254 Manafort sent Barrack a set of
notes and talking points outlining Manafort' s qualifications and his commentary on the state of
the presidential campaign.255 Gates assisted Manafort in preparing these papers.256 In
Manafort's email transmitting one such set of talking points to Barrack, Manafort highlighted

that the role he envisioned for himself would be "convention manager, non paid."257 Barrack
later recalled that the issue of payment was important because "Trump wasn't interested in
paying anybody for those.positions."258 Barrack recalled that Manafort's offering to work for
free "were the magic words."259
(U) On February 29, 2016, Manafort sent another set of talking points to Barrack for his
transmission to Trump.260 In addition to outlining his own qualifications, this document
described Manafort's belief that the Republican "establishment" had begun to organize an effort
to disrupt Trump's nomination and provided a set of recommendations to Trump~ 261 Later that
day, Barrack sent an email to Trump's assistant, Rhona Graff, but addressed the message to
"Donald."262 The email described how the convention would be "critical" and that Manafort was
"the most experienced and lethal of managers ... Paul handled all of the conventions and is a
killer, he would do this in an unpaid capacity .... I've attached a couple of Paul's thought pieces
for your consideration - PLEASE PLEASE take the time to read the attachments."263 Barrack
attached to the email both ofManafort's previous memoranda to him, totaling five pages.264
Barrack sent the same email and attachments to Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, stating "I
think it is really, really important and Manafort is a genius killer but the opposite of Stone."265
Ivanka Trump responded that she would "print and show the attached and below to DJT
following Super Tuesday:"266 Corey Lewandow~ki, then the campaign manager, recalled that
r
257 (U) Email; Manafort to Barrack, February 25, 2016 (CLNS_ SSCI_Q0000lO). In his email transmitting the.
talking point document, Manafort also highlighted his foreign political work and his knowledge of"modem
campaign technology": "I have spent the last 20 years running campaigns outside of the US. So, I am up to date on
modem campaign technology and the key players with expertise." The Committee has no further information about
this claim. At about the same time that Manafort and Gates joined the Trump Campaign, however, Gates reached
out to a political consultant with ties to Israel seeking Israeli social media influence technology. See infra Vol. 5,

Ivanka Trump ultimately did share the email with her father along with a handwritten note at the
bottom wh.ich read: "Daddy, Tom says we should get Paul."267
(U) Following Super Tuesday, Barrack continued to email lvanka Trump and Jared
Kushner to press them to consider hiring Manafort.268 Barrack forwarded these emails to
Manafort, saying "FYI. I am trying."269 Barrack also told Manafort that he would talk to Trump
"one on one" on March 11, 2016, and "lean hard."270 Later, on March 11, Manafort emailed
Barrack and inquired if Barrack was still getting "pushback'' from Trump.271 Barrack responded
that he was continuing to get pushback. 272 Manafort then asked Barrack if he should "be patient
or start moving on," noting that he had "kept my calendar open."273 Barrack responded that he
was continuing to "push subtly. "274
(U) Throughout this time, Manafort and Barrack both communicated with Stone. Stone
shared with Barrack his belief that Trump "needs Manafort" and lobbied Barrack to help
Manafort obtain a position on the Campaign.275 Stone wrote in an email to Barrack:
You are the only one who can do this. Donald sees you as a peer - the rest of us
are just vassals. he has )10 research or plan. his handlers reinforce his worst
instincts . ... I think lvanka and Jared and Don,Jr [sic J and Eric have had their
fill of Corey. We will know Tues if we are headed to a brokered convention- if so
he needs Manafort or he will get robbed.216
(U) According to Barrack, Stone was also in touch with Trump directly to recommend
that Trump hire Manafort.277 Phone records support this claim, showing that from March 1,
2016, to March 16, 2016, Stone made or received calls from Trump-associated numbers at least
267 (U) SSCI Transcript of the Interview with Corey Lewandowski, October 18, 2017, pp. 72, 78. Hope Hicks had a
similar recollection of the memos being provided to Trump: "Tom had sent a bunch of emails, I think to Ivanka
Trump and to Rhona Graff .... I think there were some attachments from Paul outlining a strategy he might be able
to help execute on getting the delegates.for the convention." SSCI Transcript of the Interview with Hope Hicks,
October 16, 2017, p. 108.

ten times.278 Records for that same date range also indicate that Stone either called or received
calls from Manafort's primary cell phone number eleven times.279
(U) By the evening of March 16, 2016, Trump appears to have hired Manafort.280 In an
email to Barrack with "You are the Best!!" in the subject line, Manafort told Barrack that "[w]e
are going to have so much fun, and change the world in the process."281
(U) Manafort's hiring was not made public until March 29, 2016, when the Campaign
issued a press release. However, senior Trump Campaign officials became aware of the decision
prior to the public announcement, although .they were not aware with specificity as to its timing.
For example, Hope Hicks, a close aide to Trump on the Campaign, recalled attending a dinner at
Mar-a-Lago with Trump and Manafort on March 24. At the dinner, which had been scheduled
earlier in the week, Hicks understood that the decision to hire Manafort had already been.
made.282

(U) Manafort likely made Kilimnik aware of the possibility the he would join the Trump
Campaign prior to its public announcement, judging by Kilimnik' s contemporaneous
communications at that time.
(U) Patten believed Manafort may have provided Kilimnik advance notice of his joining
the Trump Campaign.283 In particular, Patten told the Committee that he and Kilimnik had
discussed the possibility of Manafort joining the Trump Campaign before it became public.284

the day that Manafort was most likely hired, a series of calls suggest that Stone, Manafort, and numbers associated
with Trump were in communication at approximately the same time. At 4:42 PM, a number associated with the
Trump Organization contacted Stone and conducted an eight-minute call. Immediately after that call, Stone dialed
Manafort, who did not answer. Minutes later, Manafort returned Stone's call. Manafort and Stone spoke for 10 .
minutes. AT&T toll records, Roger Stone/Drake Ventures.

In a press article authored by Patten in 2019, Patten claimed that in "late 2015,"
. Lyovochkin asked Patten "whether it was true that Trump was going to hire Manafort to run his campaign."
According to his article, Patten told Lyovochkin ''thafwas an absurd notion." Sam Patteri, "Kostya and Me: How
Sam Patten Got Ensnared in Mueller's Probe," Wired, .August 14, 2019. Given Lyovochkin's close relationship
with Kilimnik, it is plausible that Lyovochkin's inquiry reflected Kilimnik's own awareness ofManafort's intention
to join the Trump Campaign. If Patten's public comment is accurate~ the timing of this question from Lyovochkin
56

Patten recalled that he believed the idea that Trump would hire Manafort was "sort of
ridiculous," while Kilimnik believed it was in fact likely.285 Immediately after the public
announcement, Kilimnik emailed the Campaign's press release announcing Manafort's hiring to
Patten in order to show Patten that Patten was wrong.286 Patten further told the Committee that
he knew Kilimnik and Manafort "were in contact" in the period prior to the announcement,
although he was not aware any specific communication relaying this information to Kilimnik.287
would suggest M

 

[Moonlight Graham]

Hey robosmith, chill out man.

[robosmith]

Chapter 6 Page 92

Quote

6. (U) Manafort's Activities For the Remainder of the Campaign

(U) After leaving the Trump Camp~ign in August 2016, Manafort stayed in touch with
Trump, Kushner, and others on the Trump Campaign. · Manafort also stayed i11 touch with
Kilimnik; and Kilimnik was aware of Manafort?s continuing communications with the . - ,. . . '

Campaign. Some evidence suggests that Manafort may have been involved in outreach from the
Ukrainian government to the Trump Campaign during this time. ·
i. (U) Manafort's Continued Contact with the Trump Campaign;
Kilimnik's awareness of these contacts · ·
(U) After his resignation on August 19, 2016, Manafort stayed in touch with the Trump
Campaign through repeated contacts with Trump, Kushner, and others.
. (U) Manafort told the FBI that, after his resignation, but before the election, he and
Trump had spoken "a few times. "539 While Manafort claimed to have not recalled the substance
of these interactions, he did recall giving Trump advice on Trump's performance in the second
debate and giving Trump ideas for the third debate.540 Separate records indicate that Manafort
and Trump spoke on the night of the election.541
(U) Manafort also told the SCO that from the time he left the Campaign until the
election, he .met with Kushner "once or twice" and spoke to Kushner on the phone "five or six
times."542 Manafort said that both sides reached out to one another.543 According to Manafort,
Donald Trump and others in his family were aware that Manafort and Kushner were in contact, ·
and Kushner "thought it would be good" for Manafort to call Trump. 544
· Kushner told the
Committee that he and Manafort were in contact, but that this contact occurred "infrequently."
Kushner recalled Mana.fort telling him to "watch the Rust Belt; that's where you're going to have
big success .... looking at the demographics and the data, he felt very strongly that the Midwest
was an area that we should be very focused on."545 Kushner did not share any more of the
substance of his discussions.with Manafort, although emails suggest Manafort continued to
provide input on Campaign strategy and encouraged the use of WikiLeaks information. For
instance, on October 21, 2016, Manafort sent Kushner an email with an attached memorandum
that provided strategy guidance recommending that the Campaign should depict Clinton "as the
failed and corrupt champion of the establishment," because "Wikileaks provides the Trump

campaign the ability to make the case in a very credible way - by using the words of Clinton, its
campaign officials and DNC members."546
(U) On November 5, 2016, Manafort sent a document entitled "Securing the Victory" to
at least Trump, Kushner, and Reince Priebus.547 The document predicted a Trump victory in the
election just days away. In the two-page memorandum, Manafort counseled that the Trump team
must prepare the public and media for this result or else face rejection and backlash. In
particular, Manafort voiced a concern that the Clinton Campaign would "move immediately to
discredit the DT victory and claim voter fraud and cyber-fraud, including the claim that the
Russians have hacked into the voting machines and ~mpered with the results."548 Manafort told
the SCO that that he had "no information" that Russia hacked voting machines.549 For a full
accounting of Russian cyber activities against U.S. electoral infrastructure, including the
penetration of a state at this time, see infra Vol. I. . Manafort also sent the memorandum to Sean
Hannity, although he said he did not expect Hannity to talk to Trump about it.550
(U) Kilimnik was aware that Manafort remained in contact with Trump and the
Campaign generally and took an interest in making use of the connection. Kilimnik told Patten
that Manafort stayed in the background, but still maintained contact and stayed close to
Trump.ss1
ii. (U) Manafort's Involvement in Ukrainian Government Outreach to the
Campaign

(U) With Gates's help, Manafort was involved in outreach from the Ukrainian Embassy
in the Unite~ States to the Trump Campaign in September 2016. This outreach came through
Frank Mermoud, a former Department of State official who was involved in organizing the
546 (U) SCO Report, Vol. I, p. 141.
547 (U) Email, Priebus to Bannon, November 5, 2016 (SKB_SSCI-0000961); FBI, FD-302, Manafort 9/13/2018.
While Manafort recalled in his interview with the SCO that he sent the memorandum to Trump's executive assistant,
the Trump Organization did not produce any such document as part of the Committee's request. Because of other
known deficiencies in the Trump Organization's document responses, the Committee does not draw the conclusion
that no document was sent. Not all senior individuals in the Trump Campaign engaged in substantive interactions
with Manafort after his departure. For instance, while Steve Bannon was the recipient of short messages of
encouragement from Manafort and responded in kind, Bannon made clear internally that he thought further
interactions with Manafort would negatively impact the Campaign. In response to Priebus forwarding Manafort's
November 5, 2016 memorandum to him, Bannon responded, "We need to avoid manafort like he has a disease.
Dems will say that the Russians are helping us win." Email, Bannon to Priebus, November 5, 2016 (SKB_SSCl-
0000964) ..

diplomatic outreach for events surrounding the July 2016 Republican National Convention in
Cleveland. At the Convention, Mermoud had introduced Manafort to then-Ukrainian
Ambassador to the United States Valeriy Chaly.552 According to Mermoud, Chaly was "upset"
about the changes to the Republican platform related to Ukraine.553 Mermoud recalled that
Manafort and Chaly had spoken on the convention floor for several minutes about Ukraine,
which had appeared to "mollify" Chaly's concems.554
(U) On September 14, 2016, Mermoud reached out to Gates, who at the time was still
serving on the Trump Campaign, with "something of extreme interest."555 Earlier that day Chaly
had emailed Mermoud a request for help arranging a meeting between Poroshenko and Trump
during Poroshenko's upcoming trip to the United Nations General Assembly.556 Later that day,
Mermoud texted Gates, asking if "Paul" had anything to say about their earlier conversation
aboutthe meeting.557 Gates responded to Mermoud's text, "Yes. Will call shortly. Going to try
and do it."558 Gates relayed a proposed day for the Trump-Poroshenko meeting through
Mermoud, but Chaly responded that day would not work for the Ukrainian side. 559 Mermoud
and Gates discussed the possibility of a call between Trump and Poroshenko instead. 560 Gate~ ·
told Mermoud that he supported the idea for a call, but instructed him not to "say anything to
chalay about a call until I speak with Paul and our scheduler."561 The Committee did not obtain
information indicating that a phone call between Trump and Poroshenko occurred during the
campaign.
(U) Mermoud was under the impression from Gates that Manafort supported the idea of
a call or meeting and was involved in it, even though Manafort had already left the Campaign. 562
Mermoud explained to the Committee that it was his understanding that Manafort was "still
talking to candidate Trump quite a bit."563 Mermoud further stated that Gates told hiin that

Manafort was "still involved, particularly at this juncture, on political ,issues relating to the
campaign."564

 

1 minute ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Hey robosmith, chill out man.

This is me chilling out with the truth.

[CdnFox]

57 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election

AKA clear findings of COLLUSION between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence, as detailed in Chapters 4-6 of the full committee report.

(u)report

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (.gov)

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov › documents

 

 

PDF

 

Aug 18, 2020 — ... Russia interfered in .the 2016 U.S. election. vi. COMMITTEE SENSITIVE-RUSSIA INVESTIGATION ONLY. Page 7. COMMITTEE SENSITIVE - RUSSIA ...

966 pages

But gatomontes99 pretends that one paragraph authored by 5 RepubliCON Senators which was NOT agreed to by other committee members like the above conclusions, takes precedence and in desperation calls posters who point that out "batshit crazy."

When HE'S LOSING THE DEBATE, it is gatomontes99 who goes batshit crazy.

Well we knew the russians tried to interfere, that was a given. Nobody said otherwise.  But collusion well lets look?

Lets seeeee...   Collusion? Nope. Says no collusion. 

The Trump campaign publicly and repeatedly promoted a policy of improving relations with Moscow which, in some ways, was a view not much different than the effort by the Obama administration to "reset" relations between the two countries. Such a policy does not itself constitute collusion or a counterintelligence threat. 

Oopsie.  No collusion and no different than obama. 

Collusion is mentioned in the document 11 times.  Almost all of them involve clinton, not trump. And at no point did they find russian collusion. 

It does have some things to say about the fbi tho

 

Meanwhile, the FBI should have followed the advice of other intelligence agencies to view Steele's reports skeptically, and the Bureau should have verified the methodology and the information before using it. Instead, the Bureau used the material in PISA applications and insisted on its inclusion in the Intelligence Community Assessment. Other IC agencies wanted to exclude the Dossier from the ICA because they had not verified its sources or its data. All 941 Americans should be deeply troubled that the FBI was willing to accept and use Steele's information without verifying its sourcing or methodology.

Sorry robo - your own source says no collusion and the FBI actied imporperly. 

[robosmith]

44 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well we knew the russians tried to interfere, that was a given. Nobody said otherwise.  But collusion well lets look?

Lets seeeee...   Collusion? Nope. Says no collusion. 

The Trump campaign publicly and repeatedly promoted a policy of improving relations with Moscow which, in some ways, was a view not much different than the effort by the Obama administration to "reset" relations between the two countries. Such a policy does not itself constitute collusion or a counterintelligence threat. 

Oopsie.  No collusion and no different than obama. 

Collusion is mentioned in the document 11 times.  Almost all of them involve clinton, not trump. And at no point did they find russian collusion. 

It does have some things to say about the fbi tho

 

Meanwhile, the FBI should have followed the advice of other intelligence agencies to view Steele's reports skeptically, and the Bureau should have verified the methodology and the information before using it. Instead, the Bureau used the material in PISA applications and insisted on its inclusion in the Intelligence Community Assessment. Other IC agencies wanted to exclude the Dossier from the ICA because they had not verified its sources or its data. All 941 Americans should be deeply troubled that the FBI was willing to accept and use Steele's information without verifying its sourcing or methodology.

Sorry robo - your own source says no collusion and the FBI actied imporperly. 

You clearly didn't read the document. Maybe you did a a search for "collusion" which didn't turn up the clear collusion between Trump's campaign manager Manafort and Russian agent Kilimnik and Oligarch Deripaska who was very close to Putin.

You believe you're clever, but being clever FAILED to unearth the clear evidence of collusion. Page 42

Quote

Kilimnik has long maintained close ties to Deripaska and his inner circle.159 Since at
least 2005, Kilimnik worked on Deripaska-related projects with Manafort in Ukraine,
Montenegro, and elsewhere. 160 A July 2006 memorandum from Manafort to Deripaska proposed
that Manafort's firm create an office in Moscow to be managed by Kilimnik. According to the
plan, the Moscow office run by Kilimnik could transfer its public relations functions to a division
within one ofDeripaska's companies managed by Georgy Oganov, a top Deripaska aide. 161

Page 43

Quote

Gates recalled that Kilimnik assisted him on matters related to Deripaska, including
serving as Manafort's point of contact with Deripaska's side of the deal for Pericles.165 Gates
recalled traveling to Russia with Kilimnik to meet with Deripaska's representatives there in
relation to B-Invest.166 However, Gates stated that Manafort at one point did not want to tell
Kilimnik about Pericles because he was worried that Kilimnik would share information about
Deripaska's fund with other oligarchs. 167

Page 56

Quote

(U) Kilimnik's Awareness of Manafort's Hiring Before the Public
Announcement
(U) Manafort likely made Kilimnik aware of the possibility the he would join the Trump
Campaign prior to its public announcement, judging by Kilimnik' s contemporaneous
communications at that time.
(U) Patten believed Manafort may have provided Kilimnik advance notice of his joining
the Trump Campaign.283 In particular, Patten told the Committee that he and Kilimnik had
discussed the possibility ofManafortjoining the Trump Campaign before it became public.

Page 58

Quote

iii. (U) Manafort Announces His Position on the Trump Campaign; Extends
Private Offers to Russian and Ukrainian Oligarchs
(U) The day after the public announcement that Manafort joined the Trump Campaign
on March 29, 2016, Gates sent Kilimnik an email with five attachments and instructions
regarding those attachments.294 Four of the attachments were personal memoranda from
Manafort and individually addressed to four recipients.295 Gates drafted the four personal
memoranda, while Manafort reviewed and approved them.296 Three of the intended recipients"
SL" (Serhiy Lyovochkin), "RA" (Rinat Akhmetov), and "BVK" (Boris Kolesnikov)-were
Ukrainian oligarchs affiliated with the OB. 297
• Serhiy Lyovochkin, a. longtime PoR and OB member, .is
common y viewe as one o the party's more sophisticated and capable officials.
Lyovochkin co-owns Ukraine's most popular television company along with U.S.indicted
oligarch and former Manafort business partner Dmytro Firtash. Lyovochkin was
a key financer for Manafort's workin Ukraine during Lyovochkip.'s time serving as the
head of Yanukovych's presidential administration, and later as a leader of the OB.
Lyovochkin is a close associate of Kilimnik, and Kilimnik has maintained frequent and
close access to him for years. In addition to Kilimnik L ovochkin has maintained other
si nificant ties to Russia and Russian-backed actors.

Page 60

Quote

The fourth memorandum, addressed to Deripaska, omitted the Ukraine language and
instead included the suggestion that Manafort could brief Deripaska on the Trump Campaign. "I
am hopeful that we are able to talk about this development with Trump where I can brief you in
more detail. I look forward to speaking with you soon."309 Gates believ~d that the purpose of
the correspondence with Deripaska was to confirm that Deripaska had dropped his lawsuit
related to Pericles.310 Gates believed that the letter did not need to mention the lawsuit because
Manafort discussed the idea of getting Deripaska to drop the lawsuit with Kilimnik verbally. 311
According to Gates, Manafort never told him anything specific as to what Manafort was offering
Deripaska.312 Gates thought that Deripaska wanted a U.S. visa and having Manafort in a position
inside the Trump Campaign might be helpful to Deripaska.313 Manafort's position could help
Deripaska develop relationships with Trump, which could have been helpful to Deripaska in
other ways as well.314

Of course, there are MANY OTHER instances of collusion between Manafort, Kilimnik and Deripaska. AKA you are a FOOL.

Maybe you NEED HELP finding them. LMAO

[CdnFox]

18 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You clearly didn't read the document. Maybe you did a a search for "collusion" which didn't turn up the clear collusion between Trump's campaign manager Manafort and Russian agent Kilimnik and Oligarch Deripaska who was very close to Putin.

They say no collusion big guy.  Sorry. It's in black and white. 

Page 43

That's not collusion. 

Page 56

also not collusion Doesn't even mention the election

Page 58

Also not collusion and DEFINITELY not trump collusion

Page 60

Also not collusion. 

 

Sorry bud - not collusion.  Not even a little bit. 

I don't think you know what collusion is. 

It's pretty clear manifort had contacts in russia. There's nothing illegal or inappropriate about that.  IT's also pretty clear that NO where are they planning on doing anything together for the eleciton. No collusion. 

 

And it actually says... NO COLLUSION

Hard fail on your part kid.  I'm afraid you went BANKRUPT on this one. 

Again:

The Trump campaign publicly and repeatedly promoted a policy of improving relations with Moscow which, in some ways, was a view not much different than the effort by the Obama administration to "reset" relations between the two countries. Such a policy does not itself constitute collusion or a counterintelligence threat.

 

[gatomontes99]

This is what happens when you challenge the fantasy world and create a cognitive dissonance. @robosmith is displaying classic symptoms of denial.

Quote

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/denial

Denial is a defense mechanism in which an individual refuses to recognize or acknowledge objective facts or experiences. It’s an unconscious process that serves to protect the person from discomfort or anxiety.

 

[Legato]

8 hours ago, robosmith said:

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election

AKA clear findings of COLLUSION between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence, as detailed in Chapters 4-6 of the full committee report.

(u)report

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (.gov)

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov › documents

 

 

PDF

 

Aug 18, 2020 — ... Russia interfered in .the 2016 U.S. election. vi. COMMITTEE SENSITIVE-RUSSIA INVESTIGATION ONLY. Page 7. COMMITTEE SENSITIVE - RUSSIA ...

966 pages

But gatomontes99 pretends that one paragraph authored by 5 RepubliCON Senators which was NOT agreed to by other committee members like the above conclusions, takes precedence and in desperation calls posters who point that out "batshit crazy."

When HE'S LOSING THE DEBATE, it is gatomontes99 who goes batshit crazy.

Well well, more Buttkiss.

[Rebound]

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well we knew the russians tried to interfere, that was a given. Nobody said otherwise.  But collusion well lets look?

Lets seeeee...   Collusion? Nope. Says no collusion. 

The Trump campaign publicly and repeatedly promoted a policy of improving relations with Moscow which, in some ways, was a view not much different than the effort by the Obama administration to "reset" relations between the two countries. Such a policy does not itself constitute collusion or a counterintelligence threat. 

Oopsie.  No collusion and no different than obama. 

Collusion is mentioned in the document 11 times.  Almost all of them involve clinton, not trump. And at no point did they find russian collusion. 

It does have some things to say about the fbi tho

 

Meanwhile, the FBI should have followed the advice of other intelligence agencies to view Steele's reports skeptically, and the Bureau should have verified the methodology and the information before using it. Instead, the Bureau used the material in PISA applications and insisted on its inclusion in the Intelligence Community Assessment. Other IC agencies wanted to exclude the Dossier from the ICA because they had not verified its sources or its data. All 941 Americans should be deeply troubled that the FBI was willing to accept and use Steele's information without verifying its sourcing or methodology.

Sorry robo - your own source says no collusion and the FBI actied imporperly. 

The FBI used the Steele report as probable cause, and nothing more.  And, lo and behold! With that probable cause came warrants, and with the warrants came criminal convictions.  
 

The Democratic Senator from New York just got convicted by Federal prosecutors. You aren’t crying about that being unfair.  The Democrat Federal prosecutor in New York just indicted the Democrat mayor of New York, for the crime of accepting first class travel and a meal in exchange for ordering the fire department to approve a building opening in time for a visit by a head of state. Imagine that’s a Republican — Open the building so the President of Turkey can visit it when he arrives, THEN add the missing fire sprinklers or whatever.  Your head would be exploding!  
 

These friends of Trump are criminals, and they were deeply involved in Russian business, and Trump’s Russia policies as President made no sense for the United States.  It still makes no sense to insist on giving Ukranian land to Russia in exchange for a “peace” which surely will not last. 

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

The FBI used the Steele report as probable cause, and nothing more.  And, lo and behold! With that probable cause came warrants, and with the warrants came criminal convictions.  
 

The Democratic Senator from New York just got convicted by Federal prosecutors. You aren’t crying about that being unfair.  The Democrat Federal prosecutor in New York just indicted the Democrat mayor of New York, for the crime of accepting first class travel and a meal in exchange for ordering the fire department to approve a building opening in time for a visit by a head of state. Imagine that’s a Republican — Open the building so the President of Turkey can visit it when he arrives, THEN add the missing fire sprinklers or whatever.  Your head would be exploding!  
 

These friends of Trump are criminals, and they were deeply involved in Russian business, and Trump’s Russia policies as President made no sense for the United States.  It still makes no sense to insist on giving Ukranian land to Russia in exchange for a “peace” which surely will not last. 

Do you actually believe Adams would have been charged if he hadn't thumbed his nose at the WH? It's no coincidence that they raided his campaign manager's home the day Adams flew to the WH to meet with Joe.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

This is what happens when you challenge the fantasy world and create a cognitive dissonance. @robosmith is displaying classic symptoms of denial.

That would be YOU who is in denial about the CLEAR EVIDENCE which is the MAJOR PART of the Republican lead bipartisan Senate Intel Committee report extensively quoted here.

There's a lot more; do you need help finding it? LMAO 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Do you actually believe Adams would have been charged if he hadn't thumbed his nose at the WH? It's no coincidence that they raided his campaign manager's home the day Adams flew to the WH to meet with Joe.

You have ZERO evidence that Joe's WH is interfering with the operation of the DoJ. AKA, just FANTASIES.

[gatomontes99]

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

That would be YOU who is in denial about the CLEAR EVIDENCE which is the MAJOR PART of the Republican lead bipartisan Senate Intel Committee report extensively quoted here.

There's a lot more; do you need help finding it? LMAO 

If it was such clear evidence, why did every single report and every news agency agree that it didn't happen?

[gatomontes99]

https://apnews.com/united-states-government-3053d226815e4c8d905322ea1d8cd1a1

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-russia-probe-durham-report/index.html

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-europe-russia-campaigns-senate-elections-9d80e603ac231ece201f6cef3ade1740

 

[gatomontes99]

31 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You have ZERO evidence that Joe's WH is interfering with the operation of the DoJ. AKA, just FANTASIES.

"You have no evidence" is what guilty people say.

[Rebound]

3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Do you actually believe Adams would have been charged if he hadn't thumbed his nose at the WH? It's no coincidence that they raided his campaign manager's home the day Adams flew to the WH to meet with Joe.

The NY Federal Prosecutors are independent of the White House.  You’re living in delusion thinking Biden orders them who to prosecute. It doesn’t help Biden to prosecute Democrats in an election year.  

[West]

Robotroll is a sad, pathetic little boy

[gatomontes99]

45 minutes ago, Rebound said:

The NY Federal Prosecutors are independent of the White House.  You’re living in delusion thinking Biden orders them who to prosecute. It doesn’t help Biden to prosecute Democrats in an election year.  

Tell me you are naive without saying "I'm naive."

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, Rebound said:

The FBI used the Steele report as probable cause, and nothing more.

Which was grossly inappropriate.  A number of agencies and experts have commented on it.  It was very clearly not normal for them to do that and that's been firmly established .

That fake "probable cause" allowed them to spend 3 years attacking and casting doubt on someone who in the end was not even a little guilty of the 'crime' they spent three years, dozens of agents and millions of dollars investigating.

That was a pretty horrible travesty of justice and it wouldn't be the last. 

6 hours ago, Rebound said:

The Democratic Senator from New York just got convicted by Federal prosecutors.

But biden walked for most of his crimes  

Sure. It's inconsistent. Makes you wonder who in the party the Senator pissed off.

6 hours ago, Rebound said:

These friends of Trump are criminals,

Manafort was a criminal.. And he was deeply involved with russia and ukraine.  

But for that matter biden and obama were very deeply involved in ukraine as well.  and that was the old ukraine where the leaders were basically russian.  And shall we talk about china?

Remember when Obama got caught on an open mike telling the russians if they behaved until the election he could do a lot more for them after?

Every world leader and major business person has ties to world leaders and businessmen of every stripe and this has been true going  back hundreds if not thousands of years.  It's how it works - you get to know all the power players, all the 'possible' future leaders and business tychoons, you develop favorable relations because you NEVER know when you'll need something.  ANd you try to convince all of them that YOU are a big deal worthy of THEIR time and energy to cultivate. 

There is nothing abnormal about that.  

Now - if trump and russia had been planning to do things together, especially illegal things, then that's different.  If they had been working together to launder a few hundred million in campaign funds for example.  Or if they had said "right, the day of the debate we're going to release this information specifically that we got about hillary so you prepare yourself to hit her hard on this issue and she'll be surprised, AND also bring this up and the next day we'll release that it's true.... "   THAT would be collusion (its actually called conspiracy but lets not get nit picky).  

There is just NOTHING here for collusion.  Like, zero. 

There's a lot to say about trump but the whole 'russian collusion' thing was absolutely untrue and fake by all available evidence, and there's a Lot of evidence to prove his innocence because the FBI inappropriately and in some cases illegally targeted him for political reasons.

[Rebound]

48 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Tell me you are naive without saying "I'm naive."

You are naive.

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

"You have no evidence" is what guilty people say.

It's what anyone says to ^the guy who ONLY posts OPINIONS with no EVIDENCE. Duh

[herbie]

Give it up. We all just ROTFL when the Trumpalo posse of insane clowns calls you the dummy.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

It's what anyone says to ^the guy who ONLY posts OPINIONS with no EVIDENCE. Duh

Uhhh - that's you big guy.  You're the guy who ONLY posts OPINIONS with no EVIDENCE. 

Duh