Right! What were the specifics of your bet again?
Trump won’t be president on Jan 1, 2019. Death = all bets off. 5:1 odds.
I had offered to put money on indictments, as he had claimed that there wouldn’t even be any subpoenas, but he backed down from that.
Ahh, yisss. From this post to God’s ears.
Yeh, I vaguely remember that too. IIRC, he seemed to think only Flynn, if anyone, would get indicted.
I should note that Papadopolous’ efforts to set up Trump-Russia meetings was widely reported on in August and discussed in this thread. What’s new in the indictment is 1) that he lied about it to the FBI, and 2) that he was informed in late April that the Russians had access to damaging emails. Also I don’t recall the senior campaign manager (IIRC Manafort) footnote showing receptivity to a low-level campaign person meeting being reported previously.
Yes, I’m aware of what you were saying. That’s why I commented on it and said that it was myopic. You countered by saying that I didn’t seem to be replying to you. I repeated that you were being myopic. You repeated your original claim. I further explained why it was myopic. And now you are restating you original claim again.
Do you want to make an argument for why your view of the investigation isn’t myopic? Or do you think that you’re really going to have some success in convincing me that there’s a miscommunication between us?
Interesting timingon Papadopoulos’ arrest (my bolding);
There are more who knew about the proposed meeting between Trump’s campaign and the Russians. And they’ve been \under Mueller’s microscope since July. Will Manafort now start singing? Is he counting on a pardon from Trump? (The Whitehouse just threw Manafort under the bus today, so perhaps not)
More arrests to follow…
I’m sorry, I thought you were purporting to contradict something I said. If you’re just saying we should be discussing something other than what we’re discussing, I’m just going to let that drop.
Just wait for the first Guest with a late 2017 join date to poke his/her nose into the thread. 
Clearly, Papadopolous has turned state’s evidence (so to speak). You don’t get a plea deal that is kept secret for a month just because you ask nicely. 
This part is particularly damning:
" On or about March 31, 2016, defendant PAPADOPOULOS attended a “national security meeting” in Washington, D.C., with then-candidate Trump and other foreign policy advisors for the Campaign. When defendant PAPADOPOULOS introduced himself to the group, he stated, in sum and substance, that he had connections that could help arrange a meeting between then-candidate Trump and President Putin"
The way Papadopoulos was described in the released paperwork seems to indicate he not only has been helping by giving testimony since his arrest, but also may have worn a wire for the FBI.
And one of the people at that meeting was Jeff Sessions.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/big-stuff-in-the-papadopolous-plea-deal
Here’s where I got the info on likely wiretap: https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/925029460142944258
Also important to note… The date of Papadopoulous’ FBI interview was the same day Trump asked Comey to pledge his loyalty at dinner that evening.
Here’s a timeline on Papadopoulos and his involvement with Russians and the campaign: History of Papadopoulos Interview, Arrest and Plea - Los Angeles Times
What I found most interesting is that Papadopoulos was first interviewed by the FBI in January of 2017 – long before Mueller was on the case. So this would have been Comey’s work. Moreover, Comey already knew about “the professor” and those meetings in Italy and London.
Here’s the WaPo reporting in August on Papadopoulos, his attempts to set up meetings with Russians, and the campaign’s reactions to those efforts. Though possibly more information will be forthcoming which will revise this.
It would seem to me, based on the indictment, that it could be difficult for Mueller to avoid also indicting the Mercury and Podesta Groups and associated principals, for Count 10 of the indictment, if not 11 as well. (They are apparently Company A & B described as the basis for Manafort’s foreign agent indictment.)
I think a bunch more information ‘forthcame’ today. You have to really dig for it, but Papadopoulos appears in a news story or two and seems to be currently generating some buzz.
If Papadopoulous was wired prior to the plea deal, it was because he convinced prosecutors he could get incriminating evidence, did so, so the government kept their part of the bargain.
If he was wired after the plea deal, it was because he convinced prosecutors he could get incriminating evidence after October 5th.
Both scenarios require the government to believe that Papadopoulous still had access and communications with the government’s target(s) after his July arrest. And not Manafort, as Manafort’s charges have nothing to do with Papa.
And, if you talked to Papa after 10-5-17, you know you were talking to a person wired.
My post was not addressed to those taking this type of simple-minded view.
I just wanted to say, I’m watching Carter Page on Chris Hayes right now, and his foamy slobber mouth is creeping me right out.
Look man, I was just trying to help you you out. You seemed to be unaware that quite a bit of new information about Papadopoulos came out since the August 14 WaPo article you linked to.
I’m not a lawyer, but this seems like a bad idea for him.