,
12 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
Mueller summary shows that many news stories over past three years have been wrong. Of the wrong stories, some were more influential than others and deserve special re-examination. Catching my eye were two Feb 14, 2017 stories which appear to initiate movement to Special Counsel.
2/ Schmidt, Mazzetti, Apuzzo NYT archive.is/ubmop alleged, based on anonymous "officials" that members of Trump campaign and other Trump associates had "repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year" up to election. Discovered at ~same time as 
3/ they discovered Russian attempts to hack DNC. Which they had discovered prior to April 2016. The officials stated that their investigations showed no evidence of collusion on hacking or election influence - a finding much less dramatic than headline. Officials were "alarmed"
4/ Confusingly, the "repeated communications" involving "Trump campaign officials" included people who were not Trump campaign officials. Similarly, communications with "senior Russian intelligence officials" included govt officials outside intel services. Hard to parse.
5/ the leakers identified Manafort as one of the advisers picked up on calls, incorrectly identifying Manafort as political consultant in "Russia and Ukraine" in original version, stealth edited (without correction) to "Ukraine" in later version
6/ interest in Manafort pre-dated Crossfire Hurricane. Schmidt et al say that FBI "did not have enough evidence" for (FISA) warrant on Manafort (did they try?). Instead it seems that they unmasked communications of Manafort's Ukrainian contacts to effect backdoor surveillance
7/ watch the pea. Schmidt et al observe that NSA initially captured calls between Trump associates and "the Russians" as routine surveillance. (But didn't they just say they tracked Manafort's UKRAINIAN contacts?) FBI asked NSA to use this data to surveille Trump associates.
8/ Schmidt et al report three other FBI targets: Carter Page, Roger Stone and Flynn. Papadop not then on horizon according to this story.
9/ an underdiscussed Manafort detail: Schmidt et al say that FBI investigation of Manafort began in spring 2016 as "criminal investigation" into his work for Party of Regions, stigmatized as "pro-Russian" - though Manafort's work was consistently pro-Europe (to my knowledge)
10/ according to NYT, FBI asked why Manafort was "in such close contact with Russian and Ukrainian intelligence officials". I've done quick scan of selected Manafort court documents: negligible-to-zero about intel officials other than rumors about Kilimnik, long-time M associate
11/ in Sentencing by judge, Manafort stated that Mueller presented no evidence that Kilimnik was Russian intel and was only "rank speculation".
12/ Mueller doesn't appear to have presented any evidence that Kilimnik was Russian intel. Judge Amy Jackson evaded the decision.
