-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Search Results for: more mueller madness
More Mueller madness
An explosion of joy among the usual media suspect greeted the indictment and arrest of Roger Stone yesterday. Yet insofar as “collusion” with organs of the Russian government in manipulating the 2016 election is concerned, there seems to be no there there. The indictment (posted below) belies it. That’s not quite the way New York Times reporters Eileen Sullivan and Sharon LaFraniere (with help from Michael Schmidt and Maggie Haberman) »
More Mueller madness
The Mueller madness has intensified to such an extent this past week that I was unable to keep up. We covered the story of Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s passing on polling data to his former Ukrainian/Russian associate Konstantin Kiliminik in the January 9 edition of this series. In that post I drew on the Wall Street Journal and AP stories while neglecting this New York Times story (accessible here »
More Mueller madness
The hits keep on coming from the New York Times and their deep state adjunct within the government. Today’s page-one story comes courtesy of Adam Goldman, Michael Schmidt, and Nicholas Fandos under the headline “F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia” (accessible here on Outline). Last night Paul Mirengoff treated the Times story with care and penetration in the nearby post “Report: FBI opened »
More Mueller madness
Today’s New York Times exposé of the nefarious activities under investigation in the the Mueller probe is “Prosecutors Examining Ukrainians Who Flocked to Trump Inaugural” (accessible here on Outline). It carries the bylines of four of the Times’s top reporters — Kenneth P. Vogel, Scott Shane, Mark Mazzetti and Iuliia Mendel, but they also had the help of Sharon LaFraniere and Maggie Haberman, who contributed reporting from Washington. That makes »
More Mueller madness
Attorneys for Paul Manafort inadvertently disclosed on Tuesday that the former Trump campaign chairman gave 2016 presidential polling data to a Kiev associate U.S. officials have linked to Russian intelligence and may have discussed a Ukraine peace plan with him. The disclosures surfaced in a filing made public Tuesday in which the attorneys disputed special counsel Robert Mueller’s allegation that their client lied to investigators about his contacts with the »
More Mueller madness
Natalia Veselnitskaya is the Russian attorney who wangled the infamous June 2016 meeting with Donald Trump Jr. under false pretenses. Vesenitskaya’s true purpose bore on advancing the interests of friends of Vladimir Putin in undoing or avoiding Magnitsky Act sanctions and other such inconveniences. In June of 2016 Veselnitskaya was in the United States to help out Denis Katsyv and his company Prevezon Holdings in connection in the asset forfeiture »
More Mueller madness
An explosion of what passes for news related to the Mueller Switch Project has appeared in the mainstream media this week. It features Jerome Corsi, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort and President Trump. Insofar as “collusion” with organs of the Russian government in manipulating the 2016 election is concerned, there seems to be no there there. I should add this related media note. The Guardian entered the scene with a dubious »
More Mueller madness
The most recent newspaper accounts of the Mueller Switch Project report on the investigation of Roger Stone. Last week brought us the Wall Street Journal’s “Mueller Investigators Probe Roger Stone Conference Calls” (accessible here on Outline). The Journal proudly notes “the subpoena of information related to [Stone’ pre-election] conference calls which hasn’t been reported before[.]” The Journal’s story was followed by the New York Times’s “Roger Stone Sold Himself to »
More Mueller madness
Today’s Wall Street Journal carries a big story in the Russia hoax genre. Reported by Byron Tau, Dustin Volz and Shelby Holliday, the story runs under the headline GOP Operative Secretly Raised at Least $100,000 in Search for Clinton Emails” (accessible here on Outline. Here are the opening paragraphs: A veteran Republican operative and opposition researcher solicited and raised at least $100,000 from donors as part of an effort to »
More Mueller madness
My Mueller madness series regularly features New York Times stories. These stories come in two subsets. One subset breathlessly advances the Mueller project by taking the latest development and projecting the path to President Trump. The other subset plays defense by rewriting history bearing on the genuine scandals underlying the Mueller investigation. If you are familiar with the primary documents and the related facts, the Times will drive you out »
More Mueller madness
It’s hard to keep up with the news related to the Mueller madness that dogs President Trump. I want to note the following items of the past day or two. The usual gaggle of New York Times reporters delivers “Lobbyist Sam Patten Pleads Guilty to Steering Foreign Funds to Trump Inaugural.” Who is Sam Patten, you may ask. Whoever he is, his sin was that he failed to register as »
More Mueller madness
Lest we forget, it bears repeating that Robert Mueller was appointed Special Counsel to take over the counterintelligence investigation into alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Yet it appears there was no such collusion. It is long past time for Mueller to wrap it up, yet he soldiers on with some other object in mind. What might it be? I offer my clue in the denomination of the probe »
More Mueller madness
Ken Vogel gives us the New York Times take on the superseding indictment of Paul Manafort alleging obstruction of justice. It comes in Vogel’s story on the new charges against Manafort and his previously unnamed Russian associate, Konstantin V. Kilimnik. The previously pending charges against Manafort of course had nothing to do with the synthetic collusion hyseteria over the 2016 election. Neither does the alleged obstruction of justice in connection »
More Mueller madness
When it comes to primary documents like the 20-page letter dated January 29, 2018 from former Trump lawyer John Dowd and the preceding 11-page memo dated June 23, 2017, both resisting an interview of the president by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, my preference is to give readers the originals via Scribd. Having obtained their own copies, the New York Times is forcing us to consult the originals here along with »
More Mueller madness
Today’s big New York Times deep dive into Mueller mania reports on the latest wedge of the investigation. This one involves a meeting three months before the election of Donald Trump, Jr. with Joel Zamel, an Israeli specialist in social media manipulation, and George Nader, an emissary for two wealthy Arab princes, from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. The Times story by Mark Mazzetti, Ronen Bergman, and David »
More Mueller madness
Earlier this week the New York Times published the list of questions Special Counsel Robert Mueller reportedly wants answered by President Trump. Timesmen Matt Apuzzo and Michael Schmidt quote the questions verbatim with their own annotations here; Schmidt’s story on the questions is published under the headline “Mueller has dozens of inquiries for Trump in broad quest on Russia ties and obstruction.” Let me emphasize that Apuzzo and Schmidt expressly »
More Mueller madness
Maggie Habermaan, Matt Apuzzo, and Michael Schmidt are three of the best reporters at the New York Times. This afternoon they report a story peddled by “three people who have been briefed on the contents of a federal search warrant.” I therefore take it that the story is derived from no one with first-hand knowledge. Indeed, it sounds like it comes from three people trying to discredit the Mueller project »