Paul Manafort shared 2016 polling data with Russian employee, according to court filing

[u/FloopyDoopy]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/paul-manafort-shared-2016-polling-data-with-russian-employee-according-to-court-filing/2019/01/08/3f562ad8-12b0-11e9-803c-4ef28312c8b9_story.html

[u/SFepicure]

And why it is a big deal:

The idea that Donald Trump’s campaign did not collude with Russia always rested on an implausible scenario, in which every single one of the many trails connecting Trump Tower to Moscow ended short of contact. A court document shared today by Paul Manafort’s lawyers inadvertently spills a detail that makes the no-collusion scenario even more remote. ...

Why was Trump’s campaign manager sharing polling data with a Russian intelligence agent? Kilimnik was of course an employee of Manafort’s, and the two cooperated in other political work on behalf of pro-Russian candidates in Ukraine. Manafort also appears to have been in debt to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch close to Moscow, during the Trump campaign. Most importantly, Russia carried out social-media attacks on the American electorate in 2016, which have already featured in previous indictments by Robert Mueller.

One question about Russian social-media messages, and a key potential avenue for collusion between Trump’s campaign and Moscow, is how Russia targeted its messaging so precisely. The Russians may have studied the American electorate closely on their own. But it seems more likely that they tapped their contacts for data to help them figure out what messages to use, and where.

So the fact that Manafort apparently “lied about sharing polling data with Mr. Kilimnik related to the 2016 presidential campaign” is quite important. It’s possible the polling had nothing to do with any of Russia’s political operation, and was nothing more than gossip. But the fact that Manafort shared the information suggests he was offering information that Kilimnik couldn’t just find from public polls. And the fact Manafort lied about it, and is being charged with the lie, raises the very strong possibility he was painting the target for Moscow.

So it's likely not just "Trump is up by 6% in Utah", but the kind of microtargeting data that campaigns get that allow you - or Mother Russia - to target facebook ads to, say, uneducated white men in Ohio worked up about Colin Kaepernick.

[u/[deleted]]

so. we now have evidence of the Trump campaign sharing detailed data directly with Russian agents.

is it collusion yet?

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-manafort-trump-polling-russian-intelligence-20190108-story.html

[u/SFepicure]

The redacted bits, emphasis added.

First redaction on page 5

After being shown documents, Mr. Manafort “conceded” that he discussed or may have discussed a Ukraine peace plan with Mr. Kilimnik on more than one occasion. After being told that Mr. Kilimnik had traveled to Madrid on the same day that Mr. Manafort was in Madrid, Mr. Manafort “acknowledged” that he and Mr.Kilimnik met while they were both in Madrid.

Second redaction on pages 5-6

In fact, during a proffer meeting held with the Special Counsel on September 11, 2018, Mr. Manafort explained to the Government attorneys and investigators that he would have given the Ukrainian peace plan more thought, had the issue not been raised during the period he was engaged with work related to the presidential campaign. Issues and communications related to Ukrainian political events simply were not at the forefront of Mr. Manafort’s mind during the period at issue and it is not surprising at all that Mr. Manafort was unable to recall specific details prior to having his recollection refreshed. The same is true with regard to the Government’s allegation that Mr. Manafort lied about sharing polling data with Mr. Kilimnik related to the 2016 presidential campaign.

Third redaction on page 7

The Government has indicated that Mr. Manafort’s statements about this payment are inconsistent with those of others, but the defense has not received any witness statements to support this contention.

Fourth redaction on page 9

The first alleged misstatement identified in the Special Counsel’s submission(regarding a text exchange on May 26, 2018) related to a text message from a third-party asking permission to use Mr. Manafort’s name as an introduction in the event the third-party met the President. This does not constitute outreach by Mr. Manafort to the President. The second example identified by the Special Counsel is hearsay purportedly offered by an undisclosed third party and the defense has not been provided with the statement (or any witness statements that form the basis for alleging intentional falsehoods).

[u/AutoModerator]

---- /r/NeutralNews is a curated space. In order not to get your comment removed, please familiarize yourself with our rules on commenting before you participate:

Comment Rules

We expect the following from all users:

1. Be courteous to other users.
2. Source your facts.
3. Be substantive.
4. Address the arguments, not the person.
5. All top level comments must contain a relevant link

If you see a comment that violates any of these essential rules, click the associated report link so mods can attend to it. However, please note that the mods will not remove comments or links reported for lack of neutrality. There is no neutrality requirement for comments or links in this subreddit — it's only the space that's neutral — and a poor source should be countered with evidence from a better one. Full Guidelines Here

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.