Mueller has evidence that 2017 Seychelles meeting was effort to establish Kremlin back channel - Polidicks

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-gathers-evidence-that-2016-seychelles-meeting-was-effort-to-establish-back-channel-to-kremlin/2018/03/07/b6a5fb8c-224b-11e8-94da-ebf9d112159c_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_no-name%3Apage%2Fbreaking-news-bar&tidr=a_breakingnews&utm_term=.e87e7fc36da9[/url] [quote]Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has gathered evidence that a secret meeting in the Seychelles just before the inauguration of Donald Trump was an effort to establish a back channel between the incoming administration and the Kremlin — apparently contradicting statements made to lawmakers by one of its participants, according to people familiar with the matter. In January 2017, Erik Prince, the founder of the private security company Blackwater, met with a Russian official close to Russian President Vladi•mir Putin and later described the meeting to congressional investigators as a chance encounter that was not a planned discussion of U.S.-Russia relations. A witness cooperating with Mueller has told investigators the meeting was set up in advance so that a representative of the Trump transition could meet with an emissary from Moscow to discuss future relations between the countries, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. George Nader, a Lebanese American business who helped organize and attended the Seychelles meeting, has testified on the matter before a grand jury gathering evidence about discussions between the Trump transition team and emissaries of the Kremlin, as part of Mueller’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 election. Nader began cooperating with Mueller after he arrived at Dulles Airport in mid-January and was stopped, served with a subpoena and questioned by the FBI, these people said. He has met numerous times with investigators.[/quote] What possible good reason could there be for them to need a secret back channel of communication with the Kremlin?

Things aren't looking too good for Erik Prince, are they?

Prince testified under oath to the opposite. Hello, perjury charge. Hello, cover-up of a criminal conspiracy. [editline]7th March 2018[/editline] Honestly, can we all just take a moment to marvel that it is now essentially a confirmed fact that a surrogate for Donald Trump held a secret meeting with a surrogate for Vladimir Putin to establish a secret means of communication between the Kremlin and Trump's team, and that there are [B]still[/B] people who believe that Mueller's investigation is "fake news?"

[URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/erik-prince-testimony-house-intel-committee-devin-nunes-russia-probe-2017-12"]Prince talked to Nunes before he testi-lied, too.[/URL] I [I]emphatically[/I] do not want either to happen, but I kind of wouldn't be surprised if Nunes either tries to flee to Russia or is found at the bottom of a lake in concrete boots by the end of this year. He's taking fantastically huge risks and he seems like the type that'd be way too much of a snake to stand up to consequences.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;53185420] testi-lied.[/QUOTE] Oh man that’s good. I love the slang we’re getting from this

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;53185145][B]Prince testified under oath to the opposite[/B]. Hello, perjury charge. Hello, cover-up of a criminal conspiracy. [editline]7th March 2018[/editline] Honestly, can we all just take a moment to marvel that it is now essentially a confirmed fact that a surrogate for Donald Trump held a secret meeting with a surrogate for Vladimir Putin to establish a secret means of communication between the Kremlin and Trump's team, and that there are [B]still[/B] people who believe that Mueller's investigation is "fake news?"[/QUOTE] Few weeks/months ago I asked what stops someone lying while testifying under oath and what happens if caught. Guess I might find out now what happens in reality :v:

What's going on in Washington? We went like a year with almost no word from the Mueller team but it feels like in the past month or so there have been leaks left and right, "Mueller thinks this, Mueller has evidence for that, the team talked to these people," etc.

[QUOTE=Lemonschooner;53185808]What's going on in Washington? We went like a year with almost no word from the Mueller team but it feels like in the past month or so there have been leaks left and right, "Mueller thinks this, Mueller has evidence for that, the team talked to these people," etc.[/QUOTE] All the reporting you're seeing is the result of the press having a laser focus on this and using all their contacts and networks to be first to report all this information; they're constantly hammering anyone who they suspect of having any involvement at all with the Mueller probe, hitting them up routinely afterwards for comments/questions as well. Consider that there are folks who are doing little but watching a particular stack of folders in a particular state office -- all to see whenever new folders are filed, in hopes to catch the merest [I]glimpse[/I] of indictments and so forth from the SCO even if all they'll be able to get unless they're unsealed is literally the docket number on the folders. That's the level of focus we're talking about here. There've been zero leaks from Mueller. Any information you gain on the investigation is coming from witnesses, defense lawyers, and so forth who have had contact with Mueller. Only thing the SCO has so far stated on the record to the press is "No comment". Folks are saying 'Mueller is paying attention to this' or 'Mueller thinks that' as a result of the actions his office is taking. It'd be like speculating what circuit a NASCAR driver is gearing up to race on depending on what tires they bought; they're guesses -- educated guesses -- but guesses nonetheless. E: As a recent example, Nunberg brought in his subpoena -- that'd be an example of one of the leaks you're talking about, and the resulting 'Mueller is thinking this' or 'Mueller is thinking that' came from questions they asked him regarding what questions [I]Mueller[/I] was asking him as well as what information Mueller was demanding he produce.

[QUOTE=arleitiss;53185802]Few weeks/months ago I asked what stops someone lying while testifying under oath and what happens if caught. Guess I might find out now what happens in reality :v:[/QUOTE] That already happened to Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, and Alex van der Zwaan, all of whom have pleaded guilty to lying and agreed to cooperate in order to avoid greater charges. None of them have been sentenced yet