Wedding Subcontractor Application: Fill & Download for Free

I’ll answer this in dual fashion and in the context of a general construction company / general contractor setting. The two pieces will be a potential customer discussing what he or she wants you to do, so that’s an interview of sorts; as a contractor, you have to decide if you want that work, and if you want that client. — Sometimes you don’t.The same can be said of a person interviewing for an open position (i.e., employment).Let’s start with the potential customer.A man walks in. He says he would like a bid; he has some pretty good drawings he made himself, so that you have a pretty good idea of what will be involved in his new construction project. You ask him where this will be located. You ask if he will be going through a bank, or if he will be doing all the financing himself. — I prefer clients who have the money for the project already.He responds that the new construction will occur nearby to me, which is good. Lower overhead; quicker road to completion. He has the money already, so I don’t have to fiddle with a banker; that’s great.Then, he does what I think is the worst thing you can do in this initial setting. → He says that he is collecting bids at the moment.My interest is now on other things.—I usually have a stack of bids I need to do, and I have other things to do as well — like operate the business and oversee current projects.When you tell me that your actual purpose of being there, talking to me that day, is to collect a bid so that you can run your numbers and determine your best value — well, you’ve just told me that you likely will not be return business for me.You’ve told me that, if you make a change order in the middle of the project, pricing for additions or deletions will be contentious; you will question my numbers.All of that is fine for you, as the customer. — It’s not fine for me; I have other customers to worry about, and I have other customers waiting for your project to get finished.People today, especially those who already have the cash now, want stuff done right now. If I could have completed their project the day before they told me about it, then that would have been a 95% satisfaction rating. And, it’s all downhill from there. — Hyperbole, yes. But, just barely.If you have a very large contract value, and you’re operating as a subcontractor for some other general contractor, and that g.c. has to satisfy architects and engineers, likely hired by their customers, then I understand the need for multiple re-bids. So many people are in that chain. The architectural firm probably wrote 800 pages about this project, which we’re all supposed to know, and 25% of what’s written in it is not even feasible in this area. So, I know that’s going to be a pain, but we deal with economies of scale. — The bigger the project (i.e., the total contract value), the bigger the reward.I don’t mind working my theoretical head off for those jobs. — But, if we’re talking about fixing the concrete in your garage, please — don’t ruin it by coming to me and saying that you’re collecting bids.Yes, yes, yes. — Some people are going to be cheaper than I am. If you want to know who those people will be, why don’t you just ask me? Likely, I know them. And, if they’re a customer of mine as well, I may just refer you off to them. I’ll still get a piece of the action, even if I’m not the “main guy” involved.Even if you choose me, I may hire them to do the work, and just take some off the top, because I have the $$,$$$/yr insurance they lack, and they work under me, so you’re covered. And, if they do a crap job, then it’s on me. — So, you get all the protection of a big player, but I don’t have to compare paint swatches with you, because I really don’t care if you paint your house lima bean or “lima” green (true story in what I just said, by the way).None of this do I mean to come off as cocky. Sure, we all have direct competitors, but when you get to a certain size, these competitors are geographically spaced far apart, which means they’re not really direct competitors.What you end up with are a bunch of smaller guys and firms, and we know each other. — Anyway, if you pin me down to hear all about your dreams and end the conversation with, “I’m just collecting bids right now” — don’t expect to get your estimate or contract tomorrow. I’ll get around to it when I get around to it.Calling every day to ask about it just makes it worse. — We may consummate this, eventually. My prices are fair. But, you hurt my feelings a bit, and it takes time to get over that.I may be too busy crying over it to stay late and work your bid up. So, just give me some time.Now, let’s say you walked into my office and asked for an application. Let’s say that I happen to be out there, and I reach in and get you one. You ask if you can fill it out there and then (which is nice of you; don’t assume that you can), and I say yes.As I turn my back to go back to what I was doing, you ask me to borrow a pen.Okay, so you just took my papers and my printer/Xerox ink. Now, you’re so unprepared that you need my pen as well? — You’re already off to a bad start.We tend to accept applications all the time for basic positions. In the construction industry, you often don’t need people until you absolutely do need them, so having a pile of recent applications is a good operating practice.No, you don’t lead applicants on that this is what you’re doing. You say, “Well, we are not hiring at the moment for that/those positions, but if you would like to fill out an application, we will keep it on file until we feel it’s no longer relevant, which is about a month or so out.”Office managers and office assistants are trained to say that. They pre-screen applicants. So, putting in an application and having it sent in a “pending tray” puts you a few steps ahead of other people, pro forma-wise at least.If you’re an exceptional candidate, then your application may be forwarded, by these gatekeepers, to various hiring managers for consideration, even if we are not technically hiring for any of the positions for which you thought you were qualified.—The application asks you for your desired rate of pay. Don’t leave that blank.I don’t know how many times I’ve said, “We all know what we need in order to survive and support ourselves and our families, so put down that number. If it’s too high for me, that doesn’t mean I won’t offer you less. I’m not going to throw your application in the trash because of the number. Likewise, if you put down $2/hr, I’m not going to pay you so little, because the law prevents me from doing that. — It’s in your best interest to write something down, and if you would prefer to write it as a range, then that’s fine. Just don’t write ‘minimum wage to infinity’.”Most of the time, when I need to hire someone, I’ve never met the person before. An assistant of mine has taken your application, and I will call over and ask one of them to look through “the stack” of current applications we have, and to pick out the ones he or she thinks look good. Then, when I make it back to the main office, or something equivalent, I’ll look them over and make a phone call. — It may be after 5pm (e.g., end of business).I ask certain questions, and then I may ask you to come in to see me the next day. — If I’m in a bind, I may even be quicker than that.I learned this next thing from an old boss of mine. I’ll probably ask you what you’re doing at the moment. I mean, do you have a side job? On unemployment? Are you broke as a joke? — What is going on “work-wise”? — Or, “What’re you doing to pass the time these days?”That’s one thing I’ll notate on your application so I remember in the future if and when I see you in person. — Given that you come in, and we talk for a while, if your last question of me is how much I pay — I’m going to look back to what I notated you said you were doing at the moment.Oh… I know what opportunity cost means. Don’t worry about that. — But, if you told me you were doing nothing, and now you’re wondering how much you will be paid for doing something, when you know the pay is nonzero and infinitely greater than zero (check the math: that is correct), you’ve thrown up a red flag; you’ve flipped a switch in my brain that I may be wasting my time; and, you may have ruined it.Obviously, I know what I can pay you; it is a range. I will tell you what I’m willing to offer when I’ve decided I’m willing to give you a chance.At the moment, you are proverbially (or actually) sitting in my office and using my pen. — I’m thinking back on some of my earliest jobs. I wanted those jobs. I really don’t know if I ever asked the prospective employer what I would get paid until after the job was offered to me.Once the offer of employment is given, then you should feel obligated to yourself, if you want to be, to ask how much you’ll be earning. — Don’t ask before you’ve been offered a job, or before I ask you what you expect to make.Of course, if I’m asking you what you expect to make, it’s probably because you left that part of the application blank. But, it could be because I found you before you had a chance to fill out an application.Again, I’m not being cocky, or mean, when I make this recommendation. That’s not my intention.In my life, I’ve hired people whom I offered more money/compensation than I got, myself, so this is not a contest.Just like the prospective customer who was bid-shopping, when you ask about pay too early, it seems like you are job-shopping. The character issue is different, though.My free time is very important to me. I have no clue what an hour of my free time is worth; what someone would have to pay me in order for me to give up that free time to do something for them. I can say that it’s not likely to be denominated in dollars. — I will play the piano at funerals, and weddings, gratis.I help kids study, whether for academics or extracurriculars. If the school is paying, I’ll take the money. If the kid or the parents are paying, I might not charge anything. Probably, that would depend on whether the kid is trying; and, in truth, if the kid weren’t trying, I probably would be back at home enjoying my free time.Sometimes, I make enough at work, for some period of giving up my “me-time”, such that, if I’d closely deliberated the trade beforehand, I would have chosen work+pay over me/free-time. — That is not a given, though.If an applicant were to ask a money/compensation question and say, “You know, I’m really working hard to find a job that pays what I need, and I need to keep trying for that, which I don’t think I’ll be able to do if I go on full-time with you, but thank you very much for the offer.” — Well, I would respect that answer.If I have Saturday or Sunday work, I would then ask the applicant if he’d like me to call him if I have something when he’s not otherwise able to job hunt. — That has been mutually beneficial before, in these situations.More often, though, I get someone with basically no qualifications who wants the moon and just refuses to get out of bed in the morning if he can’t get it. — This would be a general laborer position.I’ve literally told people like that, who get mad and throw a fit in the office, that “we don’t pay you to interview, and we don’t pay for your gas, either.”I love paying people great money when they are well-qualified, experienced, and do a great job. Heck, if they do a great job, that’s really the only qualification or experience they need. — I’m not cheap. — I believe paying people well is a great way to retain people and to motivate them.One of several ways, of course.I’ve also had people who said they’d work for minimum wage, which was $7.25/hr, and I said — no — we don’t pay so little for what I’m going to be having you do.So, those people were so eager and motivated to work — to get out of the house — that if they’d just be given a job, — a chance — they’d work for the least possible amount a businessperson could pay legally.This is the mindset I’ve had when I applied for jobs that I wanted, though if the employer had said, “OK — minimum wage it is!” — I would’ve politely hopped and skipped out the door with a “thanks for the chance” whistling out of my bum on the way out.I can’t say that’s ever happened. — If I got paid minimum wage, it was because I applied for a minimum-wage job. I knew that beforehand.I want people who want to work. If, in the future, these people find better jobs, that pay more, then ask me for a recommendation letter, and you’ll probably get it. — I would never stand in the way of someone doing something better for himself or herself, even if I taught him or her how to be the more qualified individual.Just don’t waste my time. — If you don’t want to work, I’m going to figure it out. You probably won’t realize how I do it, but I will. Before I hire you. And, that may affect your starting pay. It might. It might not. — Depends on how much I need you, to tell the truth.Your long-term pay, though, will depend mainly on your performance and your desire to work. — If you just deign to come to work, then you probably won’t see a raise from me, ever.That said: “(I)f you try sometimes, well, you might find / You get what you need.”

Well, having lived that life all my life, I (under great protest) learned to type. So my day job has always been some sort of secretarial work, eventually in law firms, then I became a word processor, and that paid my bills and allowed for flexible schedules while I pursued my dreams of acting and writing. Working at a law firm even made it possible, along with so many loans I thought I’d never get them paid off, to get an MFA in Film Production at USC.And while I have had bad days and times that felt like nothing good would ever happen for me, looking back, there has been so much good. A flexible word processing schedule and the good salary of a word processor at a law firm (then, not now - they outsource) allowed me to take acting classes at the best studio in New York City, which led to knowledge and skill and a feeling of fulfillment and friends that are still friends on Facebook (they’re still in NYC and I’m in LA). My film school eventually hired me as Nonlinear Editing Coordinator, and Avid and my students helped me find a niche where I genuinely contributed and loved it. Now I’m doing that again for a private company with a post-production education division and loving it. It’s the dream I’m making real now.I guess what I’m saying is to find your own way to make your dreams, your passion more congruent with the realities of your life. Not give them up, but move toward them while being able to pay for your life. If what you really want to do is star in Hamilton (or its equivalent that would be yours), figure out what you can do to pay rent and buy food while you go to school (there are musical comedy majors in colleges all over the country), work in summer theater, then figure out what you can do to make it possible to live in NYC AND still pursue your dream (musical comedy = NYC). A friend of mine is a bartender, has been for years. He’s got seniority so he can have a flexible schedule and it gives him time to audition, take classes and appear in plays.If you want to make films, make them on your iPhone with friends, put them up on YouTube, see what happens while you work your day job. Eventually you’ll probably have to move to LA, but there are film festivals for every size and genre of film all over the place (there’s two of them in my home town of Estes Park, one specifically devoted to horror films) that you only hear about if you search them out. A lot of them accept short films and will be glad to send you a PDF of deliverables and an application and application deadline. If you get good reactions, you’ll get a chance to move up. Go to film school, doesn’t have to be USC. Okay, USC is the best, but there are film programs (some of which are designed for people who work all day with classes in the evenings and on weekends), create films on your iPhone that you can shoot with friends, actors who need a gig, and production teams who want to learn, and keep sending them out; meanwhile, get as good a job as you can either inside or outside the Industry to keep body and soul together. You may find a way to make this all come together. Say you love making documentaries and say your company, for which you work as a lowly computer nerd, is doing something which is actually rather interesting, like being a subcontractor for Space X (pulled that out of the air). Ask the marketing department if they’d like a documentary (flattering but true) of working with Elon Musk (or whatever or whoever). Then you’re combining the day job with the real job and that can get you places.Nobody said it’s all a piece of cake. Listen, really listen, to any celebrity, artist, photographer, or any other kind of profession that is unreliable as to money, and you’ll hear of all the years of figuring out to pay the rent, trying to make the real love fit with making money, and then finally finding a place where it all works. Sometimes that place is huge, sometimes you fall into it but only if you were prepared can you make a real go of it. Another friend, a photographer, was willing to work for damned near nothing when he was young to follow rock groups around and take pictures that are still stunning today. To pay for this, he opened a little studio in Estes Park where he combined 19th century costumes with sepia toned photography to thrill tourists with old-fashioned portraits. He also did my and many other weddings. Now he and his wife just got back from the Telluride Film Festival where he photographed, among others, Angelina Jolie. He’s a happy (and quite eccentric) man who figured out his own niche in the world he wanted to inhabit and eventually how to pay for it and for he and his family to have a good life. His name is Moses Street, he’s on Facebook and if you “friend” him, you’ll have a lot of good photos to look at and a very funny man to enjoy.So good luck. Find the day job that either (a) fits in with or goes toward what you really want, or (b) is flexible enough and pays well enough to allow you to take the classes, do the auditions, have time to write, paint, or whatever is your passion.And if your passion is coding, you are so in luck these days . . . .

With all due respect, I am from the NYC Metro area.I have no skin in this psycho-drama, but it appears very, very familiar to me.(See links in blue, BOLD font.I have watched the Donald for much of his career, since he insisted on making it so public. He was then a near illiterate grifter Confidence trick - Wikipedia - I am not making this up. He made his money by defrauding his investors, working with the Mafia (on occasions), and stiffing payments to his many subcontractors - those too powerless to compel him to pay them, what he owed them.First miscellaneous observation: He finished his last two years at university at Wharton School of Business. He is remembered there, Former Wharton Professor: 'Trump Was the Dumbest G*ddamn Student I Ever Had' Prof. Kelley often referred to Trump’s arrogance when he told the story that Trump came to Wharton thinking he already knew everything. (You need to read that article to grasp the professor’s unrestrained contempt for the current US President - a rare degree of contempt, indeed, and long before Trump came into public view.)Second: Have people actually observed him cheating?“He cheats like hell … donald-trump-golf-cheat-suzann-pettersen?“They say that if you cheat at golf, you cheat at business. I’m pretty sure he pays his caddie well, since no matter how far into the woods he hits the ball, it’s in the middle of the fairway when we get there.”Trump is listed as having a three handicap, a phenomenal achievement for a man in his 70s who also has to find time to run a country. Pettersen is a little skeptical of that figure.Is Donald Trump lying about having a three handicap?“He always says he is the world’s best putter. But in all the times I’ve played him, he’s never come close to breaking 80,” she said. “But what’s strange is that every time I talk to him he says he just golfed a 69, or that he set a new course record or won a club championship some place. I just laugh.Third - Another way to judge a man is to take the measure of his hand picked lawyers - and still again, today as we observe, Trump selection of lawyers of very questionable ethics and capabilities is much the same as before.More to the point here - More recently, what astounded me about his presidential run was that, while a large fraction of the wider, uninitiated, naive American electorate were captivated by his normal carnival act, I personally was struck by how very little, indeed, he had changed during the 2+ decades since I had last had to pay attention to his antics.He is exactly the same guy. Unchanged - really.Usually, you can expect people in the public eye to grow, or mature, or whatever - but not the Donald. His one achievement is that, due to his repeated, sequential bankruptcies, no regional investors / bankers remained, who were foolish enough to have anything to do with investing in his get-rich-quick schemes. So, apparently (Muller will hopefully advise us fairly soon) he got in bed with (some) Russians, helping them get “their” money out of Russia, in what already has been identified, by US state and federal law enforcement, as money laundering on a truly, exceptionally large scale. Trump sold $1.5 billion of condos to potential money launderersIt can be helpful to compare the Nixon scandal with the current unfolding Trump affair, noting that Nixon was “only” engaged in a bungled breakin of a campaign office to steal campaign information. Nevertheless, Nixon’s “little” scandal resulted in 40 government officials indicted or jailed. (See full tally, here: Watergate Casualties and Convictions). The reports around Trump are considerably more massive, and more severe. They point to “one of those” (breakin), plus massive money laundering, and plus engaging in covert espionage activities with a foreign adversary - and Mueller has yet a long way to go. Trump Is in Much Deeper Trouble Than Nixon Was After the First Watergate IndictmentsIt also is worth noting that Trump, unlike Nixon, is under investigation for criminal activities before he became president. Some of these investigations are being performed in the various states (and aided, indirectly, by the well funded FBI investigations). It is worth noting that US Presidents cannot pardon convictions by the individual states. So, unlike Nixon, Trump (and others, especially his family) may be imprisoned, ultimately, by one or more states, regardless of the outcome of Mueller’s federal FBI investigation.Here is one investigative reporter’s tally of the Muller investigation, including several additional, sealed indictments - note his numerous hot links to take you to the source documents supporting his arguments: Trump Russia Update (#27) Mueller may already have four more targets under sealed indictmentBack to your question: Trump (including his family) probably is “best” at such financial crimes, perhaps even so far as justifying indictments under RICO Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Do you fear having “problems” with the IRS over their audits of your tax returns? Then definitely avoid getting yourself charged and convicted under RICO - they will literally take everything you own ! (I actually worked with a guy who was convicted under RICO - everything he had owned was seized, he is well over 70 years old, and will remain in jail for many years more, and his wife is “free” on the outside, fending alone by herself.) What remains to be seen (more “best”) is whether Trump exceeds the ultimate achievement (a charge of Treason) of Benedict Arnold. While on its face it may seem laughable, one can only speculate. It would be a new “first” in American history to convict a sitting US president of Treason - but: Why not? Trump’s first year as US President has truly been a year of “firsts”.For the more intrepid readers, here is a presentation of over 15 Links between Trump associates and Russian officials - WikipediaNot to worry - my opinion is wholly unimportant.History is being written by the real professionals, as we doodle here on the Internet. We should have the full measure of this “greatest American president” within the next decade or so - but the Nixon achievements of 40 indictments / jailed may be a considerable undercount for the ultimate Trump scorecard. Trump Is in Much Deeper Trouble Than Nixon Was After the First Watergate IndictmentsDon’t forget: even members of both Houses of Congress are already potentially involved (Chuck Grassley, Devin Nunes, or even Paul Ryan house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016 “I-think-Putin-pays-Trump”). Recently (Feb 2, 2018) speculation in the press suggests that release of the Nunes “Memo” may implicate not only Nunes, but SOH Paul Ryan, and also Trump, in Obstruction of Justice Harvard Prof: If Trump’s Involved in Releasing Nunes Memo, it ‘Must Be’ to Obstruct Justice and Mueller should call Nunes to testify in obstruction probe. Trump has been suggested as potentially even the author of the Nunes Memo, himself.Nunes memoUpdate Friday, Feb 2, 2018: Trump and Fox News have spent 2 weeks announcing that this secret memo would serve to justify dismantling the FBI investigation, and potentially also serve to justify a Trump “Saturday Night Massacre” by firing Deputy AG Rod J. Rosenstein to open a path to firing Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller: With the Saturday Night Massacre, Nixon Miscalculated. Will Trump?. While both Nunes and Trump have claimed they have not actually read the 3-page Memo, it was read by someone who unequivocally publically states the Mueller’s FBI investigation is NOT discredited: Trey Gowdy: Nunes memo does not discredit Mueller probe in any way. and Gowdy says surveillance warrant would not have been authorized without dossier and Nunes Memo Accidentally Confirms the Legitimacy of the FBI’s InvestigationUpdate Friday, Feb 2, 2018: The Nunes Memo focuses on the serial approval of highly secret FISA warrant applications for surveillance of Carter Page. The classified info behind the FISA applications were released no earlier that early Jan, 2018 Nunes: DOJ Will Turn Over Mueller Probe Documents. But during an interview last October 30, Page announced: “When the truth comes out, when Speaker Paul Ryan says the FISA warrant, the details about the dodgy dossier, and what happened and all the documents around that is going to be released, that’s what I’m really excited about and I think the truth will set a lot of people free - that’s what I’m really excited about.” At that time his FISA reference made no sense, suggesting that the Nunes activities were a set up deal, rather than a legitimate investigation. How did Page know last October about this work by Republicans (approved by SOH Ryan) to discredit both, to and most important, how early did the work begin - See the Oct 30, 2017 interview:Last year, Congress passed new sanctions against Russia, with a super majority so extreme it has been called historically near-unique. (Deadline looms for Trump and Russia sanctions) As of the Monday deadline, Trump has declined to impliment them trump-administration-breaking-law-failing-issue-new-russia-sanctionsLast week, CIA Director Pompeo secretly met outside of Washington with the three top Russian intelligence officials: Alexander Bortnikov (Director FSB), Sergey Naryshkin (head of the SVR), and Igor Korobov (Director of GRU). CIA director Pompeo met top Russian spies Such a meeting (all 3 together and in the US) has never before occurred before in US history. News of this meeting was withheld, but US media learned of it, indirectly, from Russian news announcements. Although Pompeo later announced that this very exceptional (secret) meeting was to discuss cooperation with the Russians on terrorism, he pointedly refused to deny whether Russian sanctions were discussed. (Pompeo on meetings with Russians: 'We vigorously defend America in these encounters')Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday also demanded to know why Naryshkin, who is on a previous sanctions list (and barred from entering the US), was allowed to enter the United States - at all.CIA director Mike Pompeo met the Russian spy chief behind the 2016 election hacking campaignrussian-spy-chiefs-met-in-washington-with-cia-director-to-discuss-counterterrorismHow does the exceptional (secret) CIA meeting in Washington with the three heads of Russian intelligence (one who is not permitted US entry) relate to matters under investigation by the Mueller investigation ?In the “intelligence business”, it is a rule of thumb to be suspicious of matters which seem to be coincidences. Are these two stories only “coincident” ?The Dec 3, 2017 New York Times Operative Offered Trump Campaign ‘Kremlin Connection’ Using N.R.A. Ties, starting not later than May, 2016, “… the outreach shows how, as Mr. Trump closed in on the nomination, Russians were using three foundational pillars of the Republican Party — guns, veterans and Christian conservatives — to try to make contact with his unorthodox campaign.” This followed last year’s, Jan 18 (2017) FBI, 5 other agencies probe possible covert Kremlin aid to Trump, which they have followed up this year (Jan 18, 2018), McClatchy DC Bureau FBI investigating whether Russian money went to NRA to help Trump.This is getting closer to demonstrating conspiracy (.e., “collusion”), indeed.And then there is the mystery surrounding the Trump $107 million Inauguration Fund. Raising nearly twice as much as Barack Obama's 2009 record of $53 million, Trump’s Inauguration celebration was much smaller - perhaps costing half as much. Trump’s team announced they would donate the leftover funds ($50 - $75(?) million) to charities (A record $107 million was raised for Trump’s inauguration. So where did it all go? No one will say.) Over the last year, the fund announced several deadlines for closure, with no published results. A fund manager was Rick Gates (political consultant) - Wikipedia, indicted with Paul Manafort - Wikipedia, both charged with conspiracy against the United States, making false statements, money laundering, and failing to register as foreign agents for Ukraine as required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Speculative? For the moment, sure. But here is another “taste”: Leonard Blavatnik, a Ukrainian-born (post Soviet) billionaire, has contributed $383,000 to the Republican National Committee since late April 2016 and added another $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund. Those figures include more than $12,000 that was later directed into President Trump’s legal defense fund. He did not give directly to the Trump campaign. Special counsel probing flow of Russian-American money to Trump political funds.Also potentially involved in the Russia probe under FBI investigation is even another 2016 presidential candidate, the Green Party US Presidential candidate, Jill Stein (in photo on lower right). Jill Stein's Connection to PutinTrump's victory margin smaller than total Stein votes in key swing statesWhy should the collusion to be only with Russia? Just to make it a little more interesting (from 04–2017): Mueller Names Trump’s Foreign ‘Colluding’ Power: Israel. Who could be next? Turkey, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Saudi Arabia?Some even predict that Trump has caused so much damage that he may mark the transition of the US, from Democracy to Autocracy:How to Build an AutocracyDavid Frum: Recovery From Trump Will Be ‘The Work Of A Generation’Recent note: Recently it was reported that last June, White House counsel Donald McGahn was an unsung hero, because he threatened to quit instead of carrying out the Trump’s order to fire FBI SC Mueller. However, it is very unlikely that McGahn is any kind of hero. See: Ari Melber : "Does Trump have the legal authority to …" - Tweet. On the one hand, as above tweet defines, firing a SC (i.e., Mueller) requires by law a written order, specifying justification for cause. The 3 justifications given by Trump to McGahn were frivolous and would not survive scrutiny. Therefore, McGahn’s refusal probably was pure self preservation - execution of Trump’s demand would arguably make him complicit in obstruction of justice. Since McGahn is not the president’s lawyer, client privilege does not apply to any required sworn testimony he might be forced to make. McGahn, who previously served as the Trump campaign's top attorney, had already found himself the subject of scrutiny, after former acting Attorney General Sally Yates' congressional testimony raised fresh questions about McGahn's role in the saga involving former national security adviser Michael Flynn. McGahn is no hero.Maybe it is now time for each of us to get a copy and read (See NYT summary here): ‘Thieves of State,’ by Sarah Chayes. (This is a truly important book, whose significance has been overshadowed by current events - it should be on your nightstand.) Ms. Chayes’s frightening warning and proscription, more than anything else, is the Trump presidency’s probable long-term playbook for America (Kleptocracy / Autocracy) - and in this, he may well be “best”.Yes - Superlatives will be used to describe the Donald Trump presidency, but the most likely categories are corruption and / or collusion, (either one - possibly with Javanka) and possibly even transition to an Autocracy.*———————————————Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 - Update:“Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said Wednesday that the panel had seen an “abundance” of evidence of collusion with Russia and obstruction by Donald Trump’s campaign and administration that is not yet public.… Schiff said there was much more to come out.Schiff, from California, added on Wednesday that the intelligence committee had also seen evidence pointing towards money laundering involving Trump’s circle, but had been hindered by the partisan deadlock that has paralysed its investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.He added: “We know that in other places they use money laundering as a way of entangling people, as a way of compromising people. To me that is far more potentially compromising than any salacious video would be.” See: https://www.theguardian.com/trump-russia-investigation-evidence-collusion-obstruction-adam-schiff?*———————————————Friday, Feb 16, 2018 - Update: - It is not a witch hunt, anymore -Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein held a press conference this afternoon to announce special counsel Robert Mueller’s (See:) indictments of Russian firms and individuals who interfered in the US 2016 Presidential election. Included in the indictment were the Internet Research Agency, also known as Glavset, an organization based in St. Petersburg that specializes in creating fake accounts on social media and generating false news stories supported by pop-up fake news sites.Mueller's indictment shows that Russia used race, religion, and guns to help Trump—and harm the U.S.“In 2014, Russia created an operation specifically meant to interfere with upcoming U.S. elections by multiple means. That operation represents a conspiracy against the United States—an act of information warfare.More so than most court documents, special counsel Robert Mueller’s (See:) Friday afternoon indictment of 13 Russian nationals tells a single, coherent narrative. And it’s a fantastic narrative. One that shows how engaged Russia was in this project, and shining light on an extent that few people realize. It has all the trappings of a Le Carré novel, including stolen identities, false fronts, and clandestine meetings. It also has moments of incredibly brazen behavior—such as Russian agents coming to the United States to stage a “grass roots rally,” and getting away with it.In fact, that could be the central theme of the indictment: Russia came loaded for bear, while the U.S was completely unprepared for almost every aspect of the “information warfare” that was being waged against it. As has happened in the past, Russia exploited both the relative openness and the freedom that Americans have, in order to infiltrate and corrupt.They also demonstrated a masterful understanding of how the tools that Americans had built for sharing baby pictures and selling high-end vitamins could be put to use spreading lies. And as they have for decades, they pounded America on those points where it’s weakest. On racism. On sexism. On guns. Using the cracks that already existed, in order to drive their wedges deep.Robert Mueller’s indictment is just 37 pages long, but it tells a story of espionage, lies, and corruption powerful enough to fill a shelf of novels. It’s a jaw-dropping, terrifying story of how a handful of operatives set out to take down a giant.And how incredibly successful they were.”*———————————————Sunday, Feb 17, 2018: Carl Bernstein praises Mueller and Rosenstein's "Brilliant Timing (of the 13 indictments), in Terms of Undercutting the President. … It "is a master stroke by Mueller and by Rosenstein that makes it extraordinarily difficult for Trump to end this investigation," Bernstein said.(See video ==>) https://www.realclearpolitics.co...*———————————————Sunday, Feb 25, 2018: Trump, Kushner and bribery, money laundering and murder.(I found the following report on Quora, written by “Quoran” John Adams. It was receiving so little interest, I decided to copy and reproduce it in total, below. As you read below, the widening investigations are spreading internationally - it is worth very careful reading, and your consideration.You can find John Adam’s original answer here: If Kellyanne Conway is found to have willfully and knowingly misrepresented facts about President Trump's alleged acquiescence in money laundering to assist him win the presidential election, will she be indicted for collusion by Mueller?“There are multiple investigations in to Trump and his kids and staff including the Mueller investigation, DC and Brooklynn FBI investigations, FEC investigations, Treasury department investigations, NY State Attorney General investigations and International investigations in to Trump and his kids foreign investments and businesses.Most people just focus on the Mueller investigations and indictments but the International investigations have already rounded up many people directly connected to Trump and Kushner and their loans and business deals and are connected to murders.The former president of Panama that assisted Trump hotel in Panama to launder money for Colombian and Russian drug lords has been arrested in Florida and the Panama papers journalist that exposed the Trump hotel connections to that money laundering was killed by car bomb. That murder has all the markings of a Russian mafia hit.https://www.npr.org/sections/the...Benny Steinmetz the wealthiest family in Israel and long time family friend of Kushner's that was heavily invested in Kushner properties and bailed out his business right after Trump was elected is indicted in international investigations for a massive money laundering operation that involves banks where both Trump and Kushner received loans.https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/...Benny Steinmetz is a member of Likud party that backs Netanyahu and now Netanyahu is under investigation for bribery and corruption and several of his cohorts arrested and it appears the deal to move the US embassy was part of the bribery deal made between Kushner and Steinmetz in exchange for bailing out his businesses. Trump approved that move over the objections of our own NSA, UN and allies and served no political purpose but served Trump and Kushner's financial purposes.https://www.haaretz.com/israel-n...The Van Der Zwann indictment is part of a much larger international investigation in to Roman Abramovich who was Van Der Zwann's client in the Ukraine deal and Abramovich is the main holder of mining in Ukraine and in the Canadian mining company supplying steel to the XL pipeline. Kushners are long time family friends of Roman and met him in Aspen just days before Trump approved the XL pipeline and walked back his promise to use only US steel. Abramovich also loaned Kushner money to save his business and Abramovich was reported showing up in his yacht and jet at Trump resorts to have private meetings with Trump and Kushner.Roman Abramovich has been directly connected to the poisoning murder of Litvinenko that was investigating Russian Oligarchs with M16 and the Ukraine corruption.https://www.politico.com/magazin...Those are investigations that are all connected to Trump and Kushner, Manafort, Gates, Fynn, Vander Zwann and Felix Sater and to Putin and the Russian Jewish Mafia.Those investigations are all resulting in indictments, and those men are starting to talk, and they are facing life in prison, so expect them to make deals and point fingers, and the people they will point at are Trump, Kushner and Putin.Trump and his kids are going down and just a matter of time! “P_________Sat, May 5, 2018 - reflecting on Trump family mafia connections …(Also see below, August 18, 2018 - News on Trump’s 34 year relationship with the Russian MafiaI found the following, as below, questioning in depth Trump’s mafia connections, Russian and Italian. Read especially the “thread on the Thread Reader App”, below.Add this to those Russian / Italian mafia connections alleged to Cohen / his uncle club El Caribe, and then to Kushner (Ukrainian / Israeli), and soon your have real mafia connections ….Is Trump a wholly owned subsidiary of Russian money, (See link), Saturday May 05, 2018https://www.dailykos.com/stories...Is Trump a wholly owned subsidiary of Russian money, which comes from mobsters, oligarchs, and Putin allies (and let’s be clear of how much those three terms overlap) ??I have been reading a thread on the Thread Reader Appthat puts together a 100+ tweet thread from NotMyPresident (@ironstowe) that traces the decades long connection between Trump and his businesses on one hand, and money from elements originating in Russia and operating here in the US largely through people of Russian and other former Soviet nationalities that can quite legitimately be classified as mobsters.The connections are overwhelming.The thread provides massive documentation, including from various media outlet stories, some of which include things like released FBI reports and judgments against entities associated with Trump.In a sense, anyone paying attention should not be surprised. After all, David Cay Johnston, who won a Pulitzer for financial reporting, has followed/covered Trump for years, and has made clear several things:- Trump was never worth $10 billion, in fact his net worth may never have exceeded $1 billion- at times Trump has had a negative net worth- Trump has been very beholden to Russian money.I knew / had read about more than half of the material provided in the thread: I am originally from New York (which I left for good in 1971, although I continued to read its media), I am a few weeks older than The Donald, and I have been paying at least some attention to him for more than 4 decades, when he started making regular appearances in various New York media outlets.While there is no doubt the statute of limitations has long since expired on many of Trump’s financial shenanigans, if Mueller’s mandate to explore Russian interference in our election allows him to follow where the money leads, as was somewhat argued in Federal Court in Alexandria yesterday by Michael Dreeben, a top assistant to Mueller, then it is legitimate to consider all of this information.The only possible quibble with the title of this piece is that those who have paid close attention to Trump over the decades might contest that Trump is wholly owned by Russians, given how closely what actual building he did, both at Trump Tower and in Atlantic City, was in conjunction with entities controlled by various elements of the Cosa Nostra.That said, whether or not the so-called “pee tape” exists (and I am inclined to believe that it does), that is not the real Kompromat on Trump. Putin and his allies are likely to have thorough documentation of how much their money has propped up Trump at least since Yeltsin began privatizing industries of the old USSR.I strongly recommend carefully reading the thread I have linked, and keeping it handy for reference.Make of this what you will.Update: Wednesday, May 9 - Christie Lockhart Comment Wed · 10 upvotesMy sources say that by this time next year, they believe Trunp, Pence, Cohen, Giuliani, Don Jr., Kushner, Bannon, Stone, Flynn, Tillerson, Wilbur Ross, Manafort, Gates, Page, Epshtyn, Gorka, Hannity, Gordon, Papadopoulos, Rep. Nunes, Rep. Rohrabacher, and *several* others will all be indicted, charged, and many will likely be convicted and on the way to prison— for conspiring against America, and our allies, with Russia.Pence is being investigated. Trump is indicted for RICO, and Ryan is under investigation for espionage, presumably, as well as money laundering, and seditious conspiracy.The GOP itself is under a RICO investigation as its target.The rumors I've been hearing say there's about 200 indictments being considered at the moment.Update: Wednesday, June 6 - Finally, from Britain, evidence that the Russian government found ways to directly assist and collude (conspire) with the Trump campaign, to get Trump elected president of the US. Cambridge Analytica, set up and funded by Trump’s largest contributor, billionaire Robert Mercer, and managed by Trump senior advisor (Trump’s shadow Chief of Staff) Steve Bannon, reached out to Wikileaks to help index and publicize the stolen materials. The Trump campaign paid Cambridge Analytica millions of dollars. Now The Guardian reports that Cambridge Analytica director 'met Assange to discuss US election'. “There was no known connection until October last year, when it was revealed that Cambridge Analytica had “reached out” to Assange in July 2016 and offered to help him index and distribute the 33,000 emails that had been stolen from Hillary Clinton.This report is so detailed and complex that I urge you to watch the video, here:New Cambridge Analytica revelations connect Trump Russia dotsJuly 9 - Reflections on the upcoming Trump-Putin summit - Following the equally queer Moscow visit, last week, when seven U.S. lawmakers, all Republicans, met with top Russian officials in Moscow over the Fourth of July recess: What really happened when GOP senators visited Moscow.As we hear more about the peculiar similarities between Brexit and Trump’s 2016 victory, I am reminded of discussions I had years ago about predictions made by Anatoliy Golitsyn. Golitsyn wrote two books (note the 4.5 stars, and the reviews):New Lies for Old (1984)The Perestroika Deception : Memoranda to the Central Intelligence Agency (1995)One can make the case, that what we are witnessing, today - these otherwise incongruent, but repetitively progressing events with respect to Russia (2016 election; Brexit; NATO; EU; NK) - are the predictions’ fulfillment. In other-words, these events are fulfillment of Soviet strategy, for conquest of the West, a strategy planned and set in motion, as early as 1959.In his book Wedge - The Secret War between the FBI and CIA (Knopf, 1994), Mark Riebling stated that of 194 predictions made in New Lies For Old, 139 had been fulfilled by 1993 (in just 8 years !), 9 seemed 'clearly wrong', and the other 46 were 'not soon falsifiable'.According to Russian political scientist Yevgenia Albats, Golitsyn's book New Lies for Old claimed that "as early as 1959, the KGB was working up a perestroika-type plot to manipulate foreign public opinion on a global scale. The plan was in a way inspired by the teachings of the 6th-century BC. Chinese theoretician and military commander Sun Tsu, who said, "I will force the enemy to take our strength for weakness, and our weakness for strength, and thus will turn his strength into weakness." Albats argued that the KGB was the major beneficiary of political changes in Russia, and perhaps indeed directed Gorbachev. According to her, "one thing is certain: perestroika opened the way for the KGB to advance toward the very heart of power" in Russia.It has been said that Mikhail Gorbachev justified his new policies as a necessary step to "hug Europe to death", and to "evict the United States from Europe".Finally, here is an associated book, which I have not read: Sowing the Seeds of Our Destruction: Useful Idiots on the “Right” Paperback (2015):“This shocking book is sure to confound conservatives, irritate libertarians, and puzzle leftists alike. Author Nevin Gussack details the communist strategy behind the manipulation of American conservatives, libertarians, and Republicans. Sowing the Seeds of Our Destruction is the first comprehensive and devastating treatment of how powerful elements of the American "conservative" and libertarian movements provided intellectual support to Russia, Red China, and other communist countries. The splits within the conservative movement and Republican Party over the naïve and appeasement-minded approach to the USSR and Red China are covered at length. American big business also played an immense role in the lobbying campaign on behalf of the Soviet Union, Putin's Russia, Red China, and Vietnam. (Exxon - you think ! Did Putin help elect Trump to restore $500 billion Exxon oil deal killed by sanctions) The actions of the US-USSR Trade and Economic Council, the US Chamber of Commerce, and other like-minded corporate globalist entities are fully documented in this book. This is a crucial book that all conservatives, nationalists, and anti-totalitarian freedom lovers need to purchase. It will perhaps motivate many grassroots patriots to ask uncomfortable questions to perfectly comfortable politicians and intellectuals.”Go figure … (PS: Golytzin’s books are not page turners - perhaps further evidence of their credibility)Update July 13: While the MSM speculates on what Trump and Putin will discuss in Helsinki - I think the most insightful speculation has already been posted by Dima: See here ==> What is the "New Yalta" deal that Putin wants USA and Europe to accept?Update Jul 18: I missed the significance of Marcy Wheeler’s story about her agonizing decision to unmask a reporting source, and talk to the FBI: Washington Post “A journalist’s conscience leads her to reveal her source to the FBI. Here’s why.” While the WP article is significant in that it discusses the on going case, as well as Ms. Wheeler’s very unusual dilemma, it states in part:“Her blog post centers on a text message she says she got from the source on Nov. 9, 2016 — about 14 hours after the polls closed — predicting that Michael Flynn, who would be Trump’s appointee for national security adviser, would be meeting with “Team Al-Assad” within 48 hours. Russia has been perhaps the Assad regime’s staunchest ally.As she noted: “The substance of the text — that the Trump team started focusing on Syria right after the election — has been corroborated and tied to their discussions with Russia at least twice since then.””In a new interview with Pod Save America, Wheeler elaborated, claiming that Mueller is “sitting on a lot” and that we’re bound to see some big plot twists before this is all over. (See Wheeler’s interview starts at 48:40 “Helsinki warmed over.” | Crooked Media”When asked if the revelations in Mueller’s report will ultimately be jaw-dropping, Wheeler said this:“I think there are some big plot twists. I did a series some months ago when the questions that Mueller wants Trump to answer came out, and I laid it out. This is clear quid pro quo. They went to Trump and said, ‘We’ll help you. We want sanctions relief, we want Syria, throw in Ukraine, maybe we’ll throw in a Trump Tower.’ And that’s it; that is the basic equation we’re talking about.”So - maybe the fog is lifting. We have Dima’s perspective (above: update July 13 - “New Yalta Deal”), Marcy’s perspective (just above), and then we have what we have personally observed of Trump’s performances, in person, in Helsinki.Go figure.Update July 25: Not a Witch Hunt, anymore?The certain fact that both the WH and the Kremlin edited the Reuter’s question out of their official transcripts, is as close to evidence of collision, or intent for such, that I have yet seen.And, then the WH placed on the WH website, an edited version of this same video - which millions around the world personally witnessed.It will require some veryclever back-stepping, to make this evidence go away.Lee———————The Atlanticreportsthat Reuters reporter Jeff Mason’s question to Putin was edited out of the White House transcript. What was the original exchange?Putin (replying to previous question): That could be a first step, and we can also extend it. Options abound, and they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.Mason: President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?Putin: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russian relationship back to normal.However, the White House transcript, um, abbreviated the exchange as follows:Putin: That could be a first step, and we can also extend it. Options abound, and they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.Mason: And did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?Putin: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.–Russia relationship back to normal.The edit excises the damning question about helping Trump win the election. The omission completely changes the meaning of the exchange, and makes it look like Putin acknowledges doing something legitimate and diplomatic, instead of admitting to hijacking the Presidential election from the American people.In addition, Rachel reported tonight that on the video on the WH website, the same part of the reporter’s question is edited out. They’ve removed the evidence!You can hear it already — “Of course no one admitted any election interference; just read the transcript and watch the video for yourself! No collusion! No collusion!”Collusion, meet Obstruction of Justice.Obstruction of Justice, meet Collusion.Updating to add link to video of Rachel’s segment about this:Click on this linked video: White House leaves Putin support for Trump out of transcriptMaddow Blog✔@MaddowBlogWhite House edits (Helsinki presser) video, to remove question about whether Putin wanted Trump to win.>>>This evidence doesn’t prove collusion / conspiracy. But it sure suggests it.Sat, Aug 18, 2018 -Have you seen House of Trump, House of Putin by Craig Unger? The author was interviewed extensively over the lest two days, stating explicitly that Trump has been involved with the Russian mafia since 1984, has sold 1300 condos to untraceable buyers for cash, the majority to Russians in his numerous locals, not least the Trump Tower. Meet the notorious characters who call Trump Tower home. Even Paul Manafort on Floor 43, since before the election. Coincidence?Is it just me, or is it a mere coincidence that Trump has been laundering money for the Russians since 1984, while Michael Cohen until very recently owned part of his uncle’s social club El Caribe, as mentioned above. a social club and “headquarters” for the US mafia. A Brief History of Michael Cohen's Criminal TiesRather than enter a transcript, See one interview, here: Author: Trump is Russia’s asset in the White HouseWed, Aug 22, 2018 -A quote from August 22’s WP: Trump’s chickens may be coming home to roost“… how spectacularly corrupt he was — not just boorish, sexist and racist, but someone who had spent a career lying in public and engineering one grift after another, to exploit people and cheat the gullible out of their money, whether it was Trump University or the Trump Institute or the Trump Network, or his habit of refusing to pay contractors, the exploitation of foreign models, or his foundation that was essentially a scam, or his apparent eagerness to have sketchy figures from the former Soviet Union use his properties for money laundering. ”Check out the links, yourselves.Thurs, Aug 31, 2018I hate it when my grim prognostications are confirmed, but Trump’s recent decapitations at the Justice Department are consistant with the references above to Cohen’s connections with various mafias, as well as Trump’s connections.(See article: Trump’s Top Targets in the Russia Probe Are Experts in Organized CrimeTrump’s Top Targets in the Russia Probe Are Experts in Organized Crime.Some of President Trump’s favorite targets in the Russia probe have spent their careers in the Justice Department and the FBI investigating organized crime and money laundering, particularly as they pertain to Russia, by NATASHA BERTRAND, Atlantic Monthly, AUG 30, 2018.“Bruce Ohr. Lisa Page. Andrew Weissmann. Andrew McCabe. President Donald Trump has relentlessly attacked these FBI and Justice Department officials as dishonest “Democrats” engaged in a partisan “witch hunt” led by the special counsel determined to tie his campaign to Russia. But Trump’s attacks have also served to highlight another thread among these officials and others who have investigated his campaign: their extensive experience in probing money laundering and organized crime, particularly as they pertain to Russia.“Read the article for the details - it is dangerous news. Yes - the Russian Mafia MAY WELL BE in the White House, and the US Congress seems just fine with that.<<< - >>>Update October 12: Inevitable release of Mueller’s investigation findingsAll along there has been speculation that Trump may interfere in the Mueller investigation, especially such that either the public will never learn what the FBI determined (because it was never made public) or that knowledge of the evidence and findings of the FBI might be thus be kept secret, essentially for ever.But: “A federal judge on Thursday (Oct 10) granted a request to unseal part of a Watergate report known as the Road Map (See: Judge Unseals Watergate Report That Led To Articles Of Impeachment Against Nixon) which gives details about President Richard Nixon’s involvement in covering up the Watergate break-in, and which was used to inform articles of impeachment against him.The Road Map, which was sent to the House Judiciary Committee in 1974, could be used as precedent for how Special Counsel Robert Mueller will end his investigation into whether Trump’s presidential campaign colluded with Russia.”What I found wholly unexpected, and vastly fascinating (see video) is that this Road Map includes an independent, unimpeded means by which Mueller can bypass resistance within either Congress, the WH or the DOJ, and make his findings public - in spite of Trump’s best efforts to prevent its release to the public - “to use the inherent authority of the Grand Jury”.And note - therefore, such findings also become known, and accessible to independent Attorneys General - of any state - who may choose to separately prosecute any of these folks in pardon-proof state courts. For RICO, just for instance.Where would you want to serve your 10 year prison sentence:Door #1: Club Fed ?Door #2: Sing Sing?State prisons are no picnic, and presumably worse than the better accommodations available for these guys within the federal prison system.WOW !Well, Donald (and all you little Trumps), you better hope there is no “There” there …Update January 1, 2019: Is this the “There, there” ?We may be about to find out.Mueller may have certain evidence (smoking gun) proving Trump was part of a conspiracy with Russia / Russians to win his election. If so, I anticipate that both houses in Congress would vote to impeach. It would look like a repetition of the events in Nixon’s case - in the summer of 1974. Given the above, Trump’s support in Congress, and especially in the Senate, would (I believe) vote to impeach. Why? In part, to fail to do so, if presented with irrefutable evidence, would likely cripple, or even split the Republican Party.Where is the proof?One great, lingering mystery has been why the Trump campaign had so many contacts with Russians, and then, why did so many Trump people lie about their contacts with Russians? And for me, most recently, why did Flynn lie to the FBI? He certainly knew, when he did it, that he, a decorated US Army General officer (!) was committing a felony. Sitting in his WH office !I could not imagine why. Clearly, he cooly decided that committing the felony in broad daylight, witnessed by two FBI investigators, was less dangerous than telling the truth.But, what was the truth?On February 29, 2016 (~ 8 months before Trump’s election), Paul Manafort sent Trump a written “pitch” document explaining how he should direct the campaign. His pitch was backed by a recommendation from Roger Stone. The presumption is that Manafort proposed to Trump to perform a redux of the methods / techniques he used in Ukraine - to elect pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovych - with Russian assistance.Fortunately, two others have done the heavy lifting to put the pieces together. Here is the first article, by Mark Sumner: (See: Here's what Paul Manafort was lying about—and it's the missing piece between Moscow and TrumpHere is the first article text:Paul Manafort was hauled back into court this week to face charges from the special counsel that he had breached his plea deal by “repeatedly lying.” And now (Second article:) the Guardian has a report that would seem to be something very, very worth lying about.Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and visited around the time he joined Trump’s campaign, the Guardian has been told.The source for the story sets Manafort’s visit to Assange in March of 2016. Which puts Manafort’s visit, and his chairing of the Trump campaign, squarely in the middle of the Russian hacking effort.This is what that period looked like when everything is put together: On February 29, Paul Manafort sent Trump a written “pitch” document explaining how he should direct the campaign. His pitch was backed by a recommendation from Roger Stone. The very next week, Trump senior campaign staffer Sam Clovis told the team that “good US-Russia relations” were a goal of the campaign. The week after that George Papadopoulos, fresh off hearing Clovis describe the campaign’s desire for good Russia relations, first met with the London-based “professor” who claimed to have Russia connections. That was all in March.So was this: Russians begin a dedicated attempt to hack into the emails of more than 300 employees of the DNC, DCCC, and Clinton campaign using two large teams of specialists. They managed to penetrate the the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, stealing 50,000 emails through a phishing attack. Hackers gained another entrance to other accounts on the campaign that same week, and began sophisticated attacks on the security of servers at the DNC. That was in March.At the end of the month, two things happened: Trump met with his campaign team, where Papadopoulos discussed Russian help and the possibility of meeting with Putin. And Paul Manafort was hired by the Trump campaign.If Paul Manafort was meeting with Julian Assange in March 2016, it shows that every part of the Russian plan, from stealing Democratic emails to distributing them through WikiLeaks, was planned in advance. And that the campaign chair of the Trump campaign was at the dead center of that plan.One key question is when the Trump campaign was aware of the Kremlin’s hacking operation – and what, if anything, it did to encourage it. Trump has repeatedly denied collusion.The March 2016 meeting wasn’t Manafort’s first visit with Assange. The use of both stolen emails and social media campaigns was something Manafort relied on heavily in his actions in Ukraine.Why did Paul Manafort lie? Because it increasingly looks like the origin of the plan to attack the United States through stolen emails, false media accounts, and social media pressure didn’t originate with Moscow, it came from Paul Manafort and Roger Stone.Manafort did for Trump what he did for pro-Russian forces in Ukraine. And with the same assist from Moscow. That’s worth lying about.And based on how Robert Mueller waited until Trump turned in his written responses before calling Manafort on the carpet, it’s going to be interesting to see how many of his lies Trump repeated.Please: Read both articles.