# Manafort and Assange - Unbelievable **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 28, 2018, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189 "2018-11-28T06:00:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/1 "2018-11-28T06:00:47Z")
In [this free and tantalizing article from The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-held-secret-talks-with-assange-in-ecuadorian-embassy) - a potential blockbuster of a story and revelation - an awful lot of evidence (mostly circumstantial but some direct) is presented to suggest that Paul Manafort was colluding with one Julian Assange. In particular, Manafort sought out Assange for the purpose of leaking material which could damage Hillary Clintons’ run for POTUS. The article also indicates that in years prior, Manafort - known to have had as clients various Russian oligarchs - had used Assange to find and release information that could damage his ‘clients’ enemies. If any of this true, I expect a stunning sequence of developments, with wide-ranging (as well as ‘vertical-ranging’ effects). The Guardian would never have taken such a chance unless they were 110 percent sure of what they were alleging. Wow. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/2 "2018-11-28T06:08:14Z")
> [@KarlGauss](#): > > In [this free and tantalizing article from The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-held-secret-talks-with-assange-in-ecuadorian-embassy) - a potential blockbuster of a story and revelation - an awful lot of evidence (mostly circumstantial but some direct) is presented to suggest that Paul Manafort was colluding with one Julian Assange. In particular, Manafort sought out Assange for the purpose of leaking material which could damage Hillary Clintons’ run for POTUS. > > The article also indicates that in years prior, Manafort - known to have had as clients various Russian oligarchs - had used Assange to find and release information that could damage his ‘clients’ enemies. > > If any of this true, I expect a stunning sequence of developments, with wide-ranging (as well as ‘vertical-ranging’ effects). > > The Guardian would never have taken such a chance unless they were 110 percent sure of what they were alleging. > > Wow. Missed edit window: I will add that The Guardian may be borrowing a trick from Turkey’s Erdogan (and will gradually release more ‘solid’, direct proof, allowing the guilty to further embarrass themselves). ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/3 "2018-11-28T06:44:03Z")
I am waiting for MI5 to reveal photos of Manafort entering the Ecuadorian Embassy. ---
**Author:** ![blindboyard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blindboyard/32/2833_2.png) [@blindboyard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blindboyard)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/4 "2018-11-28T07:45:30Z")
There is only one way into the embassy, past the police and MI5 and Ecuadorian security, who take copies of the passport of anyone entering. That makes this a bizarre and unsupported conspiracy theory. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/5 "2018-11-28T09:31:50Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > That makes this a bizarre and unsupported conspiracy theory. As I understand it, The Guardian is a reputable news source with a history of high accuracy reporting. Not to say that they can’t have been mislead by their sources or misinterpreted some information to connect things which are not actually connected, but certainly I see no cause to outright deny the information, let alone denounce it as a conspiracy theory, given what we know about the source. Do you have some form of information on which you are basing your view? > **[The Guardian - Bias and Credibility](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/)** > > LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias.  They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording From Wikipedia: “Notable scoops include the 2011 News International phone hacking scandal, in particular the hacking of murdered English teenager Milly Dowler’s phone.[13] The investigation led to the closure of the UK’s biggest selling Sunday newspaper, and one of the highest circulation newspapers in the world, the News of the World.[14] The newspaper also released news of the secret collection of Verizon telephone records held by US President Barack Obama’s administration in June 2013,[15] and subsequently revealed the existence of the PRISM surveillance program after it was leaked to the paper by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.[16] In 2016, it led the investigation into the Panama Papers, exposing the links of then British Prime Minister David Cameron to offshore bank accounts. The Guardian has been named Newspaper of the Year four times at the annual British Press Awards, the most recent in 2014 for reporting on government surveillance.[17]” ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/6 "2018-11-28T09:44:00Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > There is only one way into the embassy, past the police and MI5 and Ecuadorian security, who take copies of the passport of anyone entering. That makes this a bizarre and unsupported conspiracy theory. The print version of the story clearly states they got this from a list in a report of the Ecuadorian intelligence agency, and that the normal Embassy logging procedure for some reason did not happen. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/7 "2018-11-28T09:51:07Z")
I see it’s in the online article as well. Seems pretty carefully considered as to what it reports, and how it’s worded: > [@](#): > > Manafort’s first visit to the embassy took place a year after Assange sought asylum inside, two sources said. > > A separate internal document written by Ecuador’s Senain intelligence agency and seen by the Guardian lists “Paul Manaford [sic]” as one of several well-known guests. It also mentions “Russians”. > > According to the sources, Manafort returned to the embassy in 2015. He paid another visit in spring 2016, turning up alone, around the time Trump named him as his convention manager. The visit is tentatively dated to March. > > Manafort’s 2016 visit to Assange lasted about 40 minutes, one source said, adding that the American was casually dressed when he exited the embassy, wearing sandy-coloured chinos, a cardigan and a light-coloured shirt. > > Visitors normally register with embassy security guards and show their passports. Sources in Ecuador, however, say Manafort was not logged. > > Embassy staff were aware only later of the potential significance of Manafort’s visit and his political role with Trump, it is understood. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/8 "2018-11-28T12:45:31Z")
This might have already been addressed earlier in the thread, but assuming there was a lapse on the part of Ecuadorian embassy security, I’m wondering how someone like Manafort didn’t ring some alarm bells with MI5 or British intelligence. Manafort wasn’t exactly hiding his lobbying work in Ukraine. ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/9 "2018-11-28T13:06:32Z")
Is any of this illegal? ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/10 "2018-11-28T13:22:12Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > Is any of this illegal? I would imagine that it depends on what they were discussing and why. And specifically, on the why, who was paying Manafort at the time. There seem to be varying levels of “being a foreign agent / spy” that are criminalized, from lobbying for a foreign power without proper registration and disclosure, to being a full-on spy. As of yet, Manafort was only ever charged with the former. Maria Butina, I believe, got something in the middle - not quite a spy, but more than just a misbehaving lobbyist. If, for example, Manafort was meeting with Assange, in order to consult with the Russian government on their attack of the election, then that could put him into an active military role, rather than just a political role, since the election hacking was a military action by Russia’s Military Intelligence Agency (GRU). Active coordination with a foreign military goes up under treason and spying. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/11 "2018-11-28T14:06:28Z")
I have no idea how colluding with Assange is being characterized as colluding with Russians, could someone fill me in? I have noticed this trend in reporting on this issue. Seems like quite the begged question. Very sloppy. That said, I think it is a positive thing that Trump’s campaign was friendly with the Russians. The Russian government has shown no ability to reach into my life in any way, and I doubt this will change. Other European powers have too much influence on US policy. I am much more concerned about French influence on policy to throw out one example. They have dragged the US government into unnecessary and morally duibious interventions in Africa that reek of colonialism. We already know for sure a British spy was involved indirectly with the Clinton campaign. This is something that is not a threat to democracy for some reason. Not that I’m worried about the appearance of democratic integrity. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/12 "2018-11-28T14:14:27Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > I have no idea how colluding with Assange is being characterized as colluding with Russians, could someone fill me in? I have noticed this trend in reporting on this issue. Seems like quite the begged question. Very sloppy. > > That said, I think it is a positive thing that Trump’s campaign was friendly with the Russians. The Russian government has shown no ability to reach into my life in any way, and I doubt this will change. Other European powers have too much influence on US policy. Nice to have all the bases covered. There is no link to Russia. If there is a link to Russia, that’s a good thing. I didn’t kill that guy, and if I did then it was self defense. Personally, I’d rather the US be “influenced” by European nations than Russia. People in European nations are considerably [happier](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report#frb-inline) than us, and needless to say people in Russia are very much not. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/13 "2018-11-28T14:18:04Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > I have no idea how colluding with Assange is being characterized as colluding with Russians, could someone fill me in? There seems to be fairly good evidence that WikiLeaks is largely funded and protected by Russia. Probably, some amount of their work is just them doing their own thing, but some is “for the boss”. > **[How did WikiLeaks become associated with Russia?](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-did-wikileaks-become-associated-with-russia/)** > > WikiLeaks is back in the news, after Donald Trump Jr. admitted to occasionally direct-messaging the site on Twitter > **[WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential...](https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/)** > > The leak organization ignored damaging information on the Kremlin to focus on Hillary Clinton and election-related hacks. > **[The WikiLeaks-Russia connection started way before the 2016 election](https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties)** > > Julian Assange has a long, long history of ties to Putin’s state. > **[AP Exclusive: WikiLeaks files expose group's inner workings](https://apnews.com/article/af39586daf254cddb3d955453c45865d)** > > LONDON (AP) — Julian Assange had just pulled off one of the biggest scoops in journalistic history, splaying the innards of American diplomacy across the web. In the case of the DNC leak, WikiLeaks was, in essence, operating as a cut-out for Russia. Think of it like structuring a payment of $100,000 into 11 batches of $9090.90 to avoid reporting requirements for the government. If they discover you did it, the fact that no one payment was more than $10k doesn’t save you from being penalized for the full payment. Similarly, if WikiLeaks is only being involved as a way to make it look like you weren’t working with Russia, then the law considers you to have just been working with Russia. The ruse is ignored for the reality. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/14 "2018-11-28T14:26:34Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Nice to have all the bases covered. There is no link to Russia. If there is a link to Russia, that’s a good thing. I didn’t kill that guy, and if I did then it was self defense. > > Personally, I’d rather the US be “influenced” by European nations than Russia. People in European nations are considerably [happier](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report#frb-inline) than us, and needless to say people in Russia are very much not. Didn’t say there was no link between Russia and Trump. I said I am glad that there is a link. Reread. Yes I have no doubt the ongoing terrors of French colonialism do not impact their citizen’s happiness. > [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > There seems to be fairly good evidence that WikiLeaks is largely funded and protected by Russia. Probably, some amount of their work is just them doing their own thing, but some is “for the boss”. > > [How did WikiLeaks become associated with Russia? - CBS News](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-did-wikileaks-become-associated-with-russia/) > [WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign – Foreign Policy](https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/) > [The WikiLeaks-Russia connection started way before the 2016 election - Vox](https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties) > [AP Exclusive: WikiLeaks files expose group's inner workings | AP News](https://apnews.com/af39586daf254cddb3d955453c45865d) > > In the case of the DNC leak, WikiLeaks was, in essence, operating as a cut-out for Russia. > > Think of it like structuring a payment of $100,000 into 11 batches of $9090.90 to avoid reporting requirements for the government. If they discover you did it, the fact that no one payment was more than $10k doesn’t save you from being penalized for the full payment. Similarly, if WikiLeaks is only being involved as a way to make it look like you weren’t working with Russia, then the law considers you to have just been working with Russia. The ruse is ignored for the reality. Ok by evidence you mean Russia belligerent Mike Pompeo and James “Perjury” Clapper said so. Remember when the CIA and NSA were disgraced institutions? Yes Trump has rehabilitated that image quite nicely. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/15 "2018-11-28T14:31:58Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Ok by evidence you mean Russia belligerent Mike Pompeo and James “Perjury” Clapper said so. Yes, both people in the Trump and Obama administrations who would have the resources to be able to say have said so, as have media sources who have investigated the subject, as is demonstrated by the actions taken by Wikileaks as regards Russia, and as shown through leaks of their internal texts and emails to one another within the organization. I’m curious what level of evidence you’re asking for greater than that? I’m not sure that there’s much more you could get in the way of evidence short of Julian Assange dropping his pants during an interview to show a tattoo of Vladimir Putin on the underside of his balls. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/16 "2018-11-28T14:33:50Z")
Yawn. Will, this takes all of five goddamned seconds: [CIA Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to Wikileaks](http://time.com/4625301/cia-russia-wikileaks-dnc-hacking/). Wikileaks = Russians, especially in this case. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/17 "2018-11-28T15:10:29Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Yes, both people in the Trump and Obama administrations who would have the resources to be able to say have said so, as have media sources who have investigated the subject, as is demonstrated by the actions taken by Wikileaks as regards Russia, and as shown through leaks of their internal texts and emails to one another within the organization. > > I’m curious what level of evidence you’re asking for greater than that? I’m not sure that there’s much more you could get in the way of evidence short of Julian Assange dropping his pants during an interview to show a tattoo of Vladimir Putin on the underside of his balls. What did the internal communications reveal? ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/18 "2018-11-28T15:25:29Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > What did the internal communications reveal? You have the power of Google and four links that you chose to dismiss rather than read. If you have a complaint with the cites provided, feel free to raise your concerns. But my job is to support my argument, not to do your work for you. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/19 "2018-11-28T16:00:41Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > You have the power of Google and four links that you chose to dismiss rather than read. If you have a complaint with the cites provided, feel free to raise your concerns. But my job is to support my argument, not to do your work for you. First one I picked was just puffery from government hacks. This did not bode well for the remainder. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189/20 "2018-11-28T16:21:26Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Yawn. > > Will, this takes all of five goddamned seconds: > > [CIA Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to Wikileaks](http://time.com/4625301/cia-russia-wikileaks-dnc-hacking/). > > Wikileaks = Russians, especially in this case. Remember when the CIA was headed by a get-her-hands-dirty torturer? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/manafort-and-assange-unbelievable/825189.md?page=2)