George Papadopoulos
With news of yesterday’s indictments of Paul Manafort and his
colleague came word that former (minor) Trump campaign adviser George
Papadopoulos pleaded guilty earlier this month to making false statements
to investigators. In addition, we learned that Papadopoulos has been
cooperating with the Mueller investigation.
Papadopoulos was in the news back in August, when the
Washington Post reported that during the presidential campaign he sent
emails to the Trump campaign urging that the candidate meet with top Russian
leaders including Putin, but that the campaign repeatedly rejected this
suggestion. The report said the emails were “read to The Post by a person with
access to them.”
I discussed this story here.
I maintained, as I have elsewhere, that even if the Trump campaign had been
eager to obtain dirt on Hillary Clinton from Russians with Kremlin ties, that
would not be criminal in itself. I’ve never been convinced that it would even
be problematic.
Papadopoulos’ plea (a stipulation of agreed upon facts)
can be found here.
As I read the document, it is consistent with the Post’s report that, while
working for Trump’s campaign, Papadopoulos tried to arrange a meeting between
the campaign and Russian government officials. It is not inconsistent with the
Post’s report, apparently backed up by emails, that the campaign rejected the
idea of having such a meeting.
Here are key passages from the plea:
a. Defendant PAPADOPOULOS claimed that his interactions
with an overseas professor, who [he] understood to have substantial connections
to Russian government officials, occurred before [he] became a foreign policy
advisor to the Campaign. Defendant PAPADOPOULOS acknowledged that the professor
had told him about the Russians possessing “dirt” on then-candidate Hillary
Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails,” but stated multiple times that he
learned that information prior to joining the campaign.
In truth and in fact, however, defendant PAPADOPOULOS
learned he would be an advisor to the Campaign in early March, and met the
professor on or about March 14, 2016; the professor only took interest in [him]
because of his status with the Campaign; and the professor told [him] about the “thousands of emails” on or about April 26, 2016, when [he] had been a foreign policy adviser to the Campaign for over a month.
because of his status with the Campaign; and the professor told [him] about the “thousands of emails” on or about April 26, 2016, when [he] had been a foreign policy adviser to the Campaign for over a month.
b. Defendant PAPADOPOULOS further told the investigating
agents that the professor was “a nothing” and “just a guy talk[ing] up
connections or something.” In truth and in fact, however, [he] understood that
the professor had substantial connections to Russian government officials (and
had met with some of those officials in Moscow immediately prior to telling
[him] about the “thousands of emails”) and, over a period of months, [he]
repeatedly sought to use the professor’s Russian connections in an effort to
arrange a meeting between the Campaign and Russian government officials.
c. Defendant PAPADOPOULOS claimed he met a certain female
Russian national before he joined the Campaign and that their communications
consisted of emails such as, “Hi, how are you?” In truth and in fact, however,
[he] met the female Russian national on or about March 24, 2016, after he had
become an adviser to the Campaign; he believed that she had connections to
Russian government officials; and he sought to use her Russian connections over
a period of months in an effort to arrange a meeting between the Campaign
and Russian government officials.
Note that Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to making false
statements, not to trying to arrange a meeting with Russian government
officials. The latter is not, to my knowledge, a crime. A meeting between the
campaign and Russian government officials might have resulted in a crime,
depending on what transpired. However, there has been no indication so far that
such a meeting occurred.
The intriguing part of yesterday’s Papadopoulos story is news
that he is cooperating with Mueller’s investigation. What has the cooperation
consisted of? Providing the investigators with emails, such as the ones that,
somewhat mysteriously, were read to the Washington Post? Providing evidence that,
contrary to what the Post reported, there were meetings between the campaign
and Russians?
More intriguingly, did Papadopoulos wear a wire for
Mueller in an effort to ensnare Trump campaign officials? Allahpundit
speculates about this possibility.
At a minimum, the Papadopoulos plea sends the strong
message that other witnesses in this matter need to tell the truth to Mueller’s
team. It’s not a lesson that should have required reinforcement, especially
given the prosecution of Scooter Libby. But there it is.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/10/the-papadopoulos-plea.php