Pre-Reading Investigation - Learning Ally: Fill & Download for Free

You start with, "I see that Israel was founded in 1948." I am going to assume that you are not especially familiar with how this came to pass, so I will try to offer some historical context. Some reading from 1945-48 is instructive. (I apologize if you know all this already, but multiple questions on Quora lead me to believe that this is a subject that is not familiar to many. The is not intended to be any sort of political history of Israel. The hope is merely to offer a glimpse at the population that immigrated to Israel during that time.)After the war in Europe ended, there was the problem of the refugees who were displaced by the war. The Allies liberated millions who were inmates of concentration camps, forced labor camps, or prisoner-of-war camps. The plan was to return them to the countries of origin, but this was not always possible or desirable. For those who could not be easily repatriated, there were Displaced Persons camps (the conditions of which are described below).The Jews, of course, were not the only displaced persons after the war. There were more than a million refugees who could not repatriate for fear of [further] persecution. The Jews, however, received special status, undoubtedly in part because of a letter sent to Truman after he sent Earl G. Harrison to investigate the state of the DP camps. On August 8, 1945 Harrison reported,Generally speaking, three months after V-E Day and even longer after the liberation of individual groups, many Jewish displaced persons and other possibly non-repatriables are living under guard behind barbed-wire fences, in camps of several descriptions (built by the Germans for slave-laborers and Jews), including some of the most notorious of the concentration camps, amidst crowded, frequently unsanitary and generally grim conditions, in complete idleness, with no opportunity, except surreptitiously, to communicate with the outside world, waiting, hoping for some word of encouragement and action in their behalf. [...]With a few notable exceptions, nothing in the way of a program of activity or organized effort toward rehabilitation has been inaugurated and the internees, for they are literally such, have little to do except to dwell upon their plight, the uncertainty of their future and, what is more unfortunate, to draw comparisons between their treatment "under the Germans" and "in liberation." [...]The first and plainest need of these people is a recognition of their actual status and by this I mean their status as Jews [...]While admittedly it is not normally desirable to set aside particular racial or religious groups from their nationality categories, the plain truth is that this was done for so long by the Nazis that a group has been created which has special needs [...]For reasons that are obvious and need not be labored, most Jews want to leave Germany and Austria as soon as possible. [...]Their desire to leave Germany is an urgent one. The life which they have led for the past ten years, a life of fear and wandering and physical torture, has made them impatient of delay. They want to be evacuated to Palestine now, just as other national groups are being repatriated to their homes. [...]With respect to possible places of resettlement for those who may be stateless or who do not wish to return to their homes, Palestine is definitely and pre-eminently the first choice. Many now have relatives there, while others, having experienced intolerance and persecution in their homelands for years, feel that only in Palestine will they be welcomed and find peace and quiet and be given an opportunity to live and work. In the case of the Polish and the Baltic Jews, the desire to go to Palestine is based in a great majority of the cases on a love for the country and devotion to the Zionist ideal. It is also true however, that there are many who wish to go to Palestine because they realize that their opportunity to be admitted into the United States or into other countries in the Western hemisphere is limited, if not impossible. Whatever the motive which causes them to turn to Palestine, it is undoubtedly true that the great majority of the Jews now in Germany do not wish to return to those countries from which they came. [...]It cannot be overemphasized that many of these people are now desperate, that they have become accustomed under German rule to employ every possible means to reach their end, and that the fear of death does not restrain them. [...]As matters now stand, we appear to be treating the Jews as the Nazis treated them except that we do not exterminate them. They are in concentration camps in large numbers under our military guard instead of S.S. troops. One is led to wonder whether the German people, seeing this, are not supposing that we are following or at least condoning Nazi policy. [...]Quite generally, insufficient use is made of the services of displaced persons. Many of them are able and eager to work but apparently they are not considered in this regard. While appreciating that language difficulties are sometimes involved, I am convinced that, both within and outside camps, greater use could be made of the personal services of those displaced persons who in all likelihood will be on hand for some time. Happily in some camps every effort is made to utilize the services of the displaced persons and these are apt to be the best camps in all respects.That December, Truman issued a directive facilitating the immigration of DPs to the US. Without raising the established immigration quotas, he saw to it that the quotas were met almost exclusively by DPs, two thirds (~28,000) of whom were Jewish.Simultaneously, there was a push on the part of the US for the British to allow Jews to immigrate to Palestine. The British had quotas of their own, and weren't thrilled about amending them. The Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry was formed to address the issue. In addition to consulting Arab and Jewish representatives regarding Palestine, the committee also looked at the conditions of the Jewish DPs in Europe. The committee released its findings on April 20, 1946 echoing much of what Harrison had reported and recommending that 100,000 Displaced Persons be admitted into Palestine:In Poland, Hungary and Rumania, the chief desire is to get out, to get away somewhere where there is a chance of building up a new life, of finding some happiness, of living in peace and in security. In Germany also, where the number of Jews has been reduced from about 500,000 in 1933 to about 20,000 now, and most traces of Jewish life have been destroyed, there is a similar desire on the part of a large proportion of the survivors to make a home elsewhere, preferably in Palestine. In Czechoslovakia, particularly in Bohemia and Moravia, and in Austria, the position in regard to the reestablishment of the Jewish populations is more hopeful. The vast majority of the Jewish displaced persons and migrants, however, believe that the only place which offers a prospect is Palestine. [...]As described by many witnesses, a factor which has greatly increased the urgent, indeed frantic, desire of the Jews of Europe to emigrate is the feeling that all doors have been shut to them and that there is no exit.Truman supported the Jews, but his diaries suggest that he was apparently rather exasperated by all the lobbying that was being done on behalf of the Jewish DPs, to the point where he'd begun losing sympathy for them. That irritation would be tempered somewhat when, after encouraging the British to allow the immigration as recommended by the A-AIoC, British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin remarked that Americans favored Jewish immigration to Palestine because "they did not want too many of them in New York." This not-so-veiled accusation of American anti-semitism brought renewed sympathy, though Truman would later write that the Brits were muddling the situation, "but the Jews themselves are making it almost impossible to do anything for them."Again, given some of the questions I see on Quora, I imagine that it will surprise many to learn that anti-semitism, particularly in Germany and Austria, didn't go away after Hitler's defeat. While many people look at the Holocaust in horror now, not everyone felt shame, even (perhaps especially) immediately after the fact. Many countries were reluctant to welcome back the Jews who'd fled or been sent to camps during the war. In Austria, 18 months after the war had ended there was still a great deal of resentment at the idea that the Jews returning from concentration camps would want their property or their homes or their jobs back.As the Anglo-American committee report itself noted, "Nazi occupation has left behind it a legacy of anti-Semitism."Truman's 1945 directive enabled easier US immigration for DPs, but the quotas were still strictly limited. The British, not wanting to piss off the Arabs, weren't exactly welcoming them to Palestine either. Quite the contrary. Meanwhile, things in Europe were still so bad, Viennese Jews demanded that occupation troops remain until Austria rid itself of Nazism. [that story is on page 2. The story on page 1 gives you a sense of how eager the British were to allow them into Palestine.]In the summer of 1947 -- a full two years after the Harrison report, and a year after the A-ACoI report -- in Hungary, France, Italy... for many Jews, there was still nowhere to go:The most serious emergency problem in Europe today remains the situation confronting the Jews in the displaced persons' camps, Mr. Leavitt emphasized. He reported that the Jews in the German and Austrian DP camps are closely following the investigation of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. "They are holding their breaths in the hope that the investigation will yet result in some escape for them from the oppressive atmosphere of the camps to Palestine,"All of this backstory is to give a sense of the background and character of the first wave of Jews that immigrated to Israel in large numbers in 1948 and immediately thereafter. We're not talking about retired ex-pats who liked warm weather and good snorkeling.We are talking about a group of largely displaced, long-persecuted people who desperately wanted the opportunity to start a new life, and to create some level of security for themselves. It's a story of a particularly motivated population who had a keen understanding of the necessity of self-defense. Many of them were highly educated, successful Europeans who discovered that education and wealth were not enough to protect them from persecution. (In some cases, it made them the target of it.)Further, they learned that 'liberation' was unfortunately not a giant improvement over what they'd experienced under Nazi reign. And they had three years to contemplate that sad truth while they dreamed of a place where they at least had hope of survival (or dominance, depending upon your POV).Part immigrant, part refugee, above all it was a population that was resilient.Lastly, as has been pointed out, the immigration started many years earlier, particularly after 1918. Long before Palestine became Israel, the Jews had established universities, trade unions, and a defense organization that would eventually become the IDF. As with all things Israel, all of these institutions were surrounded with controversy. (For an enlightening read, try the NBER report from 1931 on the international migration of the Jews. They were unique among immigrant populations in many respects.)[Please note: I have tried to stay away from the many third rails surrounding this subject. There are many arguments to made on all sides regarding the long history of this 8,000 sq mi chunk of land in the Middle East. Whether or not Palestine was the appropriate place for post-war Jewish resettlement, whether anyone had the moral or legal authority to grant it, whether the Jews are guilty of the same attempt at 'ethnic cleansing' of Palestinians -- there are all subjects that I have no interest in addressing here.]

In chronological order, here are some of the biggest lies told by some of the US Presidents:There’s a myth that President George Washington couldn’t lie to his father about chopping down a cherry tree. But as Newsweek reports, Washington actually was guilty of writing a love letter to another woman after he had already become engaged to his future wife, Martha.President Andrew Jackson is attributed with the ‘spoil system,’ under which government officials were hired based on what they’d done for the incoming administration rather than on merit. He rewarded lucrative jobs to donors, friends, business associates, and newspaper editors.President James K. Polk wanted to expand the USA by obtaining California and New Mexico, which were Mexican territories at the time. When Mexico wouldn’t agree to sell him the territories, Polk sent troops into Texas to cross the Nueces and guard the Rio Grande. Mexico fired at the troops, in response. Polk told Congress that Mexico had “invaded our territory and shed the blood of our fellow-citizens on our own soil,” sparking the Mexican-American war.President Abraham Lincoln said a lot of things to get elected. In some speeches, Lincoln said that he wouldn’t interfere with slaveholders’ rights and he denied the equality of black people and white people. I almost left this off the list, because I believe his contributions made the lies worth it, however, saying anything to get elected, does not really justify calling him “Honest Abe.”President Ulysses S. Grant appointed dishonest officials to what some characterize as the most corrupt administration of the 19th century. Instead of acting with integrity, Grant protected his cabinet.President William McKinley told Congress that Spain blew up the U.S.S. Maine in Cuba, which started the Spanish-American war of 1898. However, thanks to an investigation in 1976, it was discovered that Spain in fact did not blow up the U.S.S. Maine. A fire on the ship reached the boat’s ammunition stock and caused an explosion.“We have no selfish ends to serve,” “We desire no conquest, no dominion,” addressed President Woodrow Wilson to the American public, in regards to WWI. We officially joined the allies in the great war, after the sinking of the Lusitania, and after a threat of Mexico aligning with Germany. The United States and England were comrades and trade partners. Wilson was aware of the allies’ motivation of ”conquest and dominion,” and beyond the rhetoric knew what involvement could place the U.S. on the world stage. After the war, he insisted that he had not learned about the treaties until the peace conference at Versailles. He would later state “Is there any man or woman let me say, is there any child who does not know the seed of war in the modern world is industrial and commercial rivalry?… This was an industrial and commercial war.” Wilson would later have a stroke, and his wife and doctor would run the country. The public was only told he was “taken ill,” and there was no absolute protocol set up to deal with the situation.President Warren G. Harding was a philanderer, who fathered illegitimate children. He was blackmailed by a former mistress who threatened to expose their affair if he didn’t vote against war with Germany. Harding also appointed numerous dishonest officials, one of whom became the first cabinet member to be convicted of a crime. Several of his appointees were convicted of bribery and fraud.When President Franklin D. Roosevelt was battling for his third term in 1940, he said “Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.” No one could have given the American people more specific promises than Roosevelt gave during the campaign of 1940, but Roosevelt knew that his actions in office would lead to war against the Nazis and the Imperial Army of Japan. No president could have done more to precipitate the United States into war than Roosevelt accomplished during the 15 months between the destroyer-for-bases deal and the attack on Pearl Harbor. As he professed peace, Roosevelt began covertly meeting with Winston Churchill to provide Great Britain with arms. Roosevelt also had an affair with his wife’s secretary and on the day he died, his mistress was there but his wife was not.President Dwight D. Eisenhower denied that U-2 spy planes were flying over the Soviet Union when, in fact, they were. In 1960, when the USSR shot down an American plane and captured its pilot, Eisenhower had to admit that the CIA had been flying spy missions over the USSR for years.If adultery counts as dishonesty, then President John F. Kennedy may well have been the most dishonest president ever to hold office, because of his playboy status and his many extra-marital affairs. He also covered up his health condition, Addison’s disease, and lied about a non-existent “missile gap” in the 1960 presidential race. Once elected, the Pentagon announced that no missile gap existed. He also said “I have previously stated, and I repeat now, that the United States plans no military intervention in Cuba,” Kennedy did intend to invade Cuba, and Fidel Castro found out. Not only did the incident cost many lives, but it also strengthened Castro and emboldened the Soviets to build bases in Cuba.Lyndon B. Johnson promised during the 1964 presidential campaign, “We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves.” At the very same time and with Johnson’s approval, the Pentagon was drawing up plans to send the first wave of more than 100,000 American servicemen to Vietnam. When two U.S. ships were attacked in Vietnam’s Gulf of Tonkin, President Lyndon B. Johnson called it an “unprovoked” attack and that he was orchestrating an aggressive response. In actuality, Johnson had already planned to attack North Vietnam and had been spying on them. Gulf of Tonkin never happened. “For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there,” said Johnson in 1965. In the film “Fog of War” the attack is also denied, by the Secretary of Defense during that time, Robert McNamara. Johnson’s determination not to “lose” Vietnam led him to keep increasing the number of American troops until they reached over 500,000. Almost 60,000 American soldiers died in the Vietnam War due to ” the lies of Lyndon JohnsonAs President Richard Nixon campaigned for office, Lyndon B. Johnson was trying to end the Vietnam War. Nixon knew that if the war continued, it would hurt Democrat Hubert Humphrey’s chances of winning the 1968 election. Nixon sent envoys to talk the South Vietnamese leaders out of attending peace talks. Nixon’s plan worked. The war continued, Nixon became president, and only then could the war end. Nixon also lied about the White House’s involvement in the Watergate burglary, until he was forced to release tapes that proved his part in the cover-up, which forced him to resign.To win the election, Ronald Reagan’s campaign met with Iran officials to delay the release of hostages until after the election. The Iran hostage crisis continued and ruined Jimmy Carter’s re-election. In 1985, Iran freed several hostages they’d taken in exchange for missiles. Reagan told the American people “We did not, I repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we,” Though, a few months later, he said: “A few months ago, I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that’s true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not.”President George H.W. Bush can famously be quoted as saying; “Read my lips. No new taxes.” There were, indeed, new taxes. “As presidents sometimes must, Bush raised taxes,” said Time magazine, in response to the tax increases. In the 1992 presidential campaign, Bill Clinton in a devastating attack ad during the 1992 presidential campaign, used this lie against him.President Bill Clinton lied about his Oval Office affair with Monica Lewinsky. Time counts Clinton’s quote, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” as one of the most “unfortunate political one liners.” After denying his affair, Clinton got impeached by the House of Representatives for lying under oath. To spite the incoming president, his staffers removed all the “W” keys from all the White House keyboards and mislabeled doors.In his attempt to convince Congress and the country, the need for a pre-emptive strike, President George W. Bush stated that “intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.” To this day, these weapons have not been found. An investigative report from the U.K. government indicated that intelligence officials “knew ahead of time that the war would cause massive instability and societal collapse“ and that war would “make the problem of terrorism worse.” Bush lied about war being forced upon the US and lied about authorizing the use of torture.President Barack Obama lied about his health care proposal, “If you like your doctor, you’ll be able to keep your doctor; if you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan.” After the passage of the ACA, four million Americans had to seek another health care plan. Obama lied about Edward Snowden’s revelations about the NSA by stating, “There is no spying on Americans.” Obama also made false accusations to justify his actions in Afghanistan and Libya.President Donald Trump claimed to have ”signed more bills…than any president ever.” At the time he made the statement, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Carter, Nixon, H.W. Bush, and Clinton had all signed more. Trump accused Obama of having wiretapped his phone. There was a FISA court order that was granted to examine possible activity between two Russian banks and a computer server in the Trump Tower, however it is unproven that Obama had ordered it. Trump has made claim that “millions of people.. voted illegally” and made specific claims of serious voter fraud in Virginia, California, and New Hampshire. Thus far, there is no proof of the illegal voters. The Democrats are concerned over more strict voting laws, which may give an advantage to Republicans, in future elections.

In the recent news, there are at least Four developments during the last 7 days, which should make “Trump aware of the gravity of Mueller’s investigation”.(Following initial answer, see numerous updates following my initial answer - up to nearly current news)First: Wednesday, June 6 - Finally, some nearly conclusive, direct evidence of collusion / conspiracy, between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government.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 so complex that I urge you to watch the video, here:New Cambridge Analytica revelations connect Trump Russia dotsSecond: Thursday, June 7 - See article: Judge sets hearing on June 15, on revoking Paul Manafort’s bail in Mueller investigation.This hearing may well immediately place Manafort in federal prison, pending the trials for his current indictments. If convicted, the charges against Manafort already may result in sentences large enough to be well beyond his life expectancy. This eventuality may induce Manafort to decide finally to “co-operate” with Mueller.Trump knows what means “co-operate with Mueller”.See article: Special counsel Mueller files witness tampering indictment against Paul Manafort and Russian citizen“Federal prosecutors asked Judge Berman to revoke bail in a motion filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. Monday night. According to an FBI affidavit included with the motion, Manafort used encrypted messaging applications in February to try to reach two unnamed business partners who could be witnesses to his alleged fraud and money laundering. The judge has ordered the FBI agent who filed the declaration regarding the messaging to be in court and available to testify if necessary.”See short video:This is about witness tampering by Paul Manafort, while he has been on bail: “The subornation of perjury is the crime of persuading a person to commit perjury, the swearing of a false oath to tell the truth in a legal proceeding, whether spoken or written.. Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.Third: Thursday, June 7 - See video: Key architect in Trump deals takes pains to lower profile “CNBC reached out to Trump chief architect John Fotiadis on April 11 for comment about this work.Trump, with Michael Cohen and John Fotiadis, traveled through / throughout the former Soviet Union, making numerous sales pitches for placement of Trump properties. As such, the question rises: What has Fotiadis been witness to? What corroboration could his testimony provide, coupled with the evidence seized in raids on Michael Cohen various residences and electronic devices, in the furtherance of Mueller’s investigation of Trump, his activities, the activities of the Trump Corporation, as well as potential conspiracy of Trump, et al, with the Russians for his 2016 election?“Between 2007 and 2013, Fotiadis designed all or part of six Trump-branded developments: a Trump Tower in Kazakhstan; a Trump-branded seaside resort in the republic of Georgia; a 47-story Trump Tower in Tbilisi, Georgia; hotel rooms at the Trump Tower in Istanbul; a Trump movie studio complex in Florida; and major portions of the Trump Parc Stamford, a condominium tower in Connecticut.”“Fotiadis did not respond to a call or an email. But eight hours later, he announced on Twitter that he was closing his firm, John Fotiadis Architect, or JFA, after 10 years in business. A few days later, Fotiadis closed the Twitter account he had used to announce he was closing down his firm.By the end of the week, all the content from Fotiadis' professional website, including his portfolio, had been removed, leaving only a notesaying he planned to join a New Jersey-based engineering company.Gone was Fotiadis' impressive portfolio of 30 projects (some of which are pictured below), including villas, schools and office buildings he has designed for clients around the world. Also gone was any reference to the two overseas branches of JFA that he had opened — in Tbilisi and Kiev, Ukraine.””This is about money laundering by Trump, and whether evidence of such money laundering may constitute Kompromat in the hands of Putin, or others.Fourth: Friday, June 8 - See article: Special counsel Mueller indicts Paul Manafort and Russian associate Konstantin Kilimnik on new obstruction charges“Special counsel Robert Mueller on Friday (June 8) filed new witness tampering criminal charges against ex-Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort as well against Russian citizen and former Manafort operative Konstantin Kilimnik.The U.S. is now charging Manafort and the associate, Konstantin Kilimnik with obstructing justice and conspiring to get potential witnesses to lie about lobbying work they’d done for Ukraine. Each of the two charges carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.For Manafort the charges come at a perilous time, just hours before (i.e., Friday, June 8) his lawyers were due to file legal briefs explaining why he should be allowed to remain free on bond pending his trial scheduled for next month in Alexandria, Va. He faces a second trial in Washington in September.Prosecutors filed court papers Monday accusing Manafort and Kilimnik of attempting to sway the testimony of two potential witnesses who might offer evidence against Manafort. Authorities charge that the conduct of Manafort and Kilimnik amounts to witness tampering, and have asked a judge to revise or revoke Manafort’s bail package.The superseding indictment (See: Superseding Indictment - full text) — the third against Manafort issued by a Washington, D.C., federal grand jury — came days after Mueller asked a judge to revoke Manafort's $10 million bail and jail him because of alleged efforts to tamper with potential witnesses at his upcoming trials.Manafort, 69, and the 48-year-old Moscow resident (See: ==> Konstantin Kilimnik were both charged with obstructing justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice by using intimidation or force against a witness, and also with tampering with a witness, victim or informant.The charges echo allegations Mueller made Monday in his request to revoke Manafort's bail.”Just for fun: The Superseding Indictment includes (on page 30) a Forfeiture Allegation, seeking to seize any properties involved in the offenses.What does it mean?I believe it is safe to assert that Trump is brilliantly aware of the gravity of Mueller’s investigation. Things are heating up for Trump in Washington, and elsewhere, and they appear to be happening at an accelerating pace.This latest indictment brings the number of people Mueller has charged in his probe of election meddling to 20. Five have pleaded guilty. The latest obstruction charges bolster Mueller’s case by laying out the argument that Manafort had corrupt intent to hide his activities, according to former prosecutors.As they say, anyone mentioned so far, who has neither been called in to speak with Mueller, nor has been indicted, is on the short list of probable, ultimate Targets of the Mueller investigation. These include all adult members of the Trump family, and at least one Kushner.Hang on to your seat.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 - Trump knows the truth, he (or his people) can read, and if this is only close to the central story - he must be aware of the gravity of the investigation.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. But it sure suggests it.- Life is uncertain - eat dessert first ….<<< - >>>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 ("white-collar, minimum-security resort") ?Door #2: Sing Sing (a choice piece of NY State real estate, like Trump Tower) ?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 November 4 (really - 11/4): Potential WH preparations to stop Mueller Investigation.Blame Tommy Hartdegen’s query to me, 11/3, “No more updates?”, to which I asked, “The blog is not long enough for you ? “Of course there is news - the question is: Can we uncover something significant? From my answer to TH (quoting myself - an odd circumstance):“My guess (guess) is that if the Democrats take control of the House (in January), they will independently initiate undertaking a parallel investigation - rather as performed for Watergate. Nevertheless, some time much sooner - after November 6th elections, using the lame duck Congress, Trump may move his own people into the DOJ to stop and silence the Mueller investigation. Potentially, he has the majority in SCOTUS, so one can imagine that he could thereby succeed in overcoming all seriously “threatening” objections (meaning - leading to hard time, or ultimate fortune forfeiture).We are in the quiet before the storm - the storm which starts November 7, 2018. It will be the next two years (2018 to 2020), not the last two years, which will be prominent in the future history books.”Although this pre-election period has been eerily quiet (the quiet before the storm?), some startling tidbits have just come to light regarding Trump’s potential near-term moves against the Mueller investigation. What is startling is that, last April, the WH secretly issued an ethics waiver to Noel Francisco. Noel John Francisco is an American attorney and the current Solicitor General of the United States - and next in line IF Rod Rosenstein is “removed”. The details are in this video:Secret waiver clears possible Trump Russia Rosenstein replacementOr see here: Trump's Secret Waiver May Allow Noel Francisco To Meddle In The Mueller InvestigationUpdate November 17: The DC docket shows dozens of sealed criminal indictments. Are they from Mueller? “ … several legal experts told ABC News the number of sealed cases awaiting action right now is unusual. Fourteen were added to the docket since late August alone, a review by ABC News has found, just as the midterm elections were drawing near and longstanding Justice Department policy precluded prosecutors from taking any public action that could appear to be aimed at influencing political outcomes.And there was good reason … for Mueller to lock in charges before the midterms.”Update January 1, 2019: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.