413

It’s amazing but for the most part the going assumption-at least through 2017- was that Bannon had little to nothing to do with Russiagate. I’d noted this fact in August of 2017 in the immediate aftermath of his ouster at the Russia House. 

I quoted Josh Marshall:

“Here’s one thing to consider as Steve Bannon leaves the White House. There’s hardly anyone in the close Trump orbit who hasn’t been tripped up in some way by the Russia investigation. There’s one big exception: Steve Bannon.”

 “Obviously I don’t know all the ins and out of the Russia probe. The Mueller operation has been extraordinarily tight. But I keep pretty close tabs. Look at all the stories. Bannon’s name basically never comes up. As far as I know he hasn’t even hired a lawyer in the probe. Why is this? My best guess is the most obvious one: for whatever reason he just wasn’t involved. There has been a persistent claim that Russian operatives were amplifying far-right news memes through the election. They also clearly seeded a number of stories into the far right news stream. But absent some kind of tangible coordination that’s not going to be something a criminal probe can take any real cognizance of.”

This, I will argue, was a very common, essentially universal view. If memory serves me even Rachel Maddow said something like this when Bannon was ousted-he was the one Trumpster who had no known Russian ties. But as the link above shows, I was always very skeptical that Bannon had no Russian ties. I strongly suspected that he was deeply involved though I had no evidence or proof. But this kind of highlights the difference between journalists who never want to go beyond the story, beyond the sources, connect any dots not clearly already drawn-unless its about the Clintons then they’re willing to be much more aggressive in their assumptions-certainly the NY Times has been over the last 25 years.

It also reminds me of the debate between Michael Wolff and the NY Times. Bringing up Wolff’s name in the context of Bannon, of course, couldn’t be more fitting.

So how did I arrive at this view? Basically through the same scorned intuition that made me strongly suspect something like Russian interference and collusion after the DNC emails were released forcing the DNC chairwoman to step down the morning of the start of the Democratic convention. For me that was just too on the nose. Yes, coincidences happen but any coincidence that convenient  has to make you skeptical or it did me. It makes you ask cui bono-who benefits?

With Bannon it just seemed that for a aggressive dirty trickster of the alt Right as he is, it’d be almost an embarrassment for him to have been a bystander if Russia collusion did happen, it was hard to believe that he wasn’t interested in acquiring the 30,000 deleted emails, or Wikileaks and never spoke to Guccifer 2.0. He was the campaign director for the last three months-and with Bannon’s penchant for dirty tricks it wouldn’t say much for him if he were totally out of the loop on all this.

But the media tended to reason that things like the  Donald Trump Jr. Trump Tower meeting with the meeting, etc, happened prior to Bannon joining the campaign. But this reasoning seemed based on the assumption that collusion didn’t happen that it was just a couple disparate events that happened prior to Bannon joining and after that they totally stopped and desisted.

Beyond the fact that Bannon as head of Breitbart had deep connections to the campaign prior to officially becoming campaign director-probably multiple links starting with Erik Prince.

At the time I pointed out that there was a clear convergence of goals between Russia and the alt Right. And Bannon himself has expressed admiration for Putin. True this isn’t direct evidence that Bannon was involved with talking to the Russians much less colluding with them during the campaign-though it might suggest he’d be willing to-for the good of white nationalists the world over.

There was, however, one piece of public evidence of Bannon’s possible involvement with collusion-he was on of the Trump senior aides to receive the email from Peter Smith about working with Russian hackers to find Hillary Clinton’s emails.

But again, this wasn’t Hillary Clinton’s campaign so nobody was being very aggressive in connecting prospective dots.

There were a few others who suspected some connection. Joy Reid was on the right track:

Indeed, we’d later learn that Bannon was actually Alexander Nix’s boss in 2014. But we’re getting ahead of ourselves, more on that below.

Note: she tweeted that in response to Justin Hendrix’s tweet that ‘I think Steve Bannon had more to do with Russian election interference than is currently understood’ but for some reason he since deleted the tweet. I’m not saying this to ‘dox’ him but to give him credit as one of the few who considered the possibility that Bannon was more deeply involved in Russian interference than commonly understood at the time-he was right.  Hendrix’s tweet was in response to this article by Aaron Blake panning Bannon’s not very persuasive dismissal of Russia as just a hoax on 60 Minutes. 

Stephen Bannon’s nervous defense of Trump on Russia is telling.”

It was, though, being a MSM journalist in good standing, Blake didn’t go far enough in connecting the dots-to the possibility that Bannon was nervous because: he himself was implicated in it.  Blake just presumed Bannon was nervous because the Russia House had no good answer on Russia. True but there is a lot more to it-Bannon’s own exposure. MSM journalists don’t connect those kinds of dots-unless the subject is Hillary Clinton. Then the dots are connected first and the reporting sets out to prove it after.

Indeed, even Mueller himself didn’t think Bannon had any meaningful Russia exposure. Until Bannon essentially co-wrote Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury.

In this book Bannon provided a lot of great, memorable quotes that led him to his permanent ban from TrumpWorld.

“Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.”

Bannon went on, Wolff writes, to say that if any such meeting had to take place, it should have been set up “in a Holiday Inn in Manchester, New Hampshire, with your lawyers who meet with these people”. Any information, he said, could then be “dump[ed] … down to Breitbart or something like that, or maybe some other more legitimate publication”.

Bannon added: “You never see it, you never know it, because you don’t need to … But that’s the brain trust that they had.”

He called the meeting near treasonous,  speculated that Kushner would go to prison, and he played the told you so game on firing Comey.

Much of the MSM panned Michael Wolff’s book-how much out of jealousy vs merit is an interesting question. But you know who read it with interest? Robert Mueller’s team. Prior to Fire and Fury, Mueller hadn’t considered Bannon a person of interest but that changed thanks to the book. 

UPDATE: The MSM’s dislike of Wolff comes from the fact that his brand of journalism is actually much better than their own as came out in a recent interview he did with-very appropriately-Dean Baquet’s New York Times.

 

Steve Bannon appears to have accidentally sicced Robert Mueller on himself.

“The FBI visited Bannon’s home on Jan. 9 to subpoena him, according to NBC News, and he is expected to talk with the special counsel’s team by the end of the month.”

“A lawyer close to Mueller’s investigation told The Daily Beast that before the release of Michael Wolff’s book Fire and Fury, the special counsel’s  team indicated zero interest in questioning President Donald Trump’s former chief strategist for their Russia probe. The team hadn’t asked to interview him, the source said.”

Bannon himself told Wolff that he didn’t expect to hear from Mueller.

“I know no Russians, I don’t know nothin’ about nothin,’” he said. “I’m not being a witness. I’m not hiring a lawyer.”

Bannon also told the author that he suspected Donald Trump Jr. introduced Kremlin-linked operatives to his father during their June 2016 Trump Tower meeting. And he said he thought the Mueller investigation was “all about money-laundering.”

After the book dropped, The Daily Beast broke the news that Bannon had retained counsel and would imminently face the House intelligence committee. He spoke with the committee, generating plenty of fireworks—on Jan. 16.

Regarding these fireworks, Bannon would be the only Trump associate subpoenaed by Devin Nunes’ GOP investigation.

“Steve Bannon was the only witness the Majority was willing to subpoena in the face of White House-directed defiance, and even there, the Majority ultimately backed down. Committee Republicans refused to consider a contempt recommendation for Bannon after the White House continued to bar Bannon from key testimony, save for answering “no” to 25 questions furnished by the White House that were meant to cover the entire period from the transition through Bannon’s tenure at the White House.”

“During Bannon’s February 15, 2018 follow-up interview, with the subpoena still in effect, Bannon refused to answer questions beyond those authorized by the White House. In response to a question from Ranking Member Schiff as to whether Bannon ever discussed the Russia investigation with either Speaker Paul Ryan or Chairman Nunes, Bannon denied communicating with Speaker Ryan, but claimed he was unauthorized by the White House to answer the question about the Chairman. Under subsequent questioning about his contacts since leaving the White House, Bannon had no choice but to acknowledge communicating with Chairman Nunes, but did not answer questions about the frequency, means, and subject matter of their communications.13 Bannon’s refusal to answer demonstrates how the White House, in confining pertinent witnesses to carefully-worded questions, sought to mislead the Committee. Although Bannon remained under subpoena, the Majority refused during the interview to order Bannon to answer questions beyond those authorized by the White House. A motion to hold Steve Bannon in contempt was also defeated on a party-line vote (see Chapter VI for transcript of March 22, 2017 business meeting).”

You suspect, however, this was more about punishing him for his ‘disloyalty’ to Trump on Fire and Fury rather than based on the perfectly good reasons to subpoena not just Bannon but Jared Kushner, Donald Jr, Manafort, etc and the reason they didn’t speaks volumes of the real motivations here-and the GOP ultimately didn’t enforce said subpoena.

The media’s sniffing at Wolff is similar to its treatment of Michael Avenatti. Say what you want about Wolff’s book but it led to Bannon eventually being interviewed by Mueller for 20 hours. 

In a likewise vein, the media wrote off Avenatti’s client, Stormy Daniels, as being a one day story. But her accusations led to the SDNY investigation that ended up with Cohen pleading guilty to eight charges-the payments to Daniels’ and other Trump affairs figuring prominently among them.

UPDATE: It’s true that any assessment of Avenatti at this point won’t be positive but the MSM was totally wrong that the Stormy Daniels’ story was a nothingburger-in fact it led to Michael Cohen’s indictment and Trump’s becoming an un-indicted co-conspirator.

Overall one can’t help but note that Bannon has Trumpitiis-he’s a true Trumpster even though Trump himself will never speak to him again. Just like Roger Stone-‘I communicated with Assange’ and ‘Soon it will be Podesta’s time in the barrel’ to say nothing of Trump himself ‘Russia if you’re listening’ and ‘That story about Trump and Russia was a made up story so I was going to fire Comey with or without recommendation’ Bannon never knows when to shut up. And I’m glad he doesn’t-his spilling his guts to Wolff was just awesome-speaking as a liberal Democrat who wants to see Trump and Kavanaugh impeached-if that’s where the facts lead-and this whole Trump gang go up the river.

But Bannon doesn’t want to go up the river and until he opened his big mouth he was set to skate. Yes, I and a few other liberal #Resistance types suspected him of being implicated in Russia on some level but the overwhelming majority of MSM journalists-even really quality liberal journalists like Rachel Maddow totally missed it. In some ways, let’s face it: the skill set of journalists-only believing what the sources put in front of you is also a limitation Nance has discussed the difference between what a journalist does and what an intel agent does. Perhaps it sounds grandiose but I think I may have by instinct some of the intel agent in me-despite having zero experience in any field remotely like it.

The trouble with the mainstream media and most people in general is they assume that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. This is why ‘conspiracy theorists’ often fill a necessary void. People who are willing to connect some of the dot-the media should relate, it’s what they do when the story’s about the Clintons.

UPDATE: But OTOH there’s the argument that there’s something lacking in the MSM’s version of journalism-what Jay Rosen calls the view from nowhere journalism. 

And Wollf’s understanding of journalism offers a fascinating alternative-where you don’t have to spend the whole day negotiating what you yourself know as a journalist-a negotiated truth.

 

But most assumed Bannon had no Russian exposure as there were no big bombshell stories with sources stating that he did.

In other words the View From Nowhere journalist is like the proverbial ostrich-because they can’t see something-as they’ve buried their head in the sand they surmise it’s not there-otherwise they would be able to see it!

And who knows, maybe you’d almost give Bannon credit for his discretion. But then Michael Wolff got a hold of him and went all Roger Stone.

Besides becoming a person of interest interviewed for 20 hours by Mueller totally due to his own big mouth, Bannon also got himself excommunicated from Trumpworld. His own media outlet turned on him-Breitbart dumped him, he’s now dead to the Mercers, and as Adam Schiff puts it he became a man without a country. This forced Bannon to poise as this great white nationalist of international renown-because he lost all his renown in his own country.

Now he spends all his time kissing Trump’s ring and poising as the caretaker of ‘real Trumpism’-or his version of it. He offers up all this advice on what the Republicans have to do to keep the House and shield Trump and friends-like Bannon himself-from Russia. But he’s dead to Trump. Only MSM journalists actually seem interested in what he has to say.

So while throughout 2017 he was under the radar-and still basically a Trumpster in good standing who could have gone back to Trump in some other capacity, Wolff’s book basically had the effect of a burn notice to his place in Trumpworld.

As to his place in Russiagate, Abramson lists who he believes are the main co-conspirators:

As I asked Seth, where is Stone’s place in all this? From what he’s said, it’s not that he doesn’t think Stone has a place in it just that he works on a different track-Stone basically goes rogue and talks directly to Trump. In any case there are a lot of signs that Stone is a major subject, if not a target of Mueller’s. He’s stated himself that he may be going to prison soon and Mueller certainly seems to be closing in. 

UPDATE: That has certainly proven correct as he awaits his criminal trial in November this year. 

Since I originally wrote this chapter on October, 2018 we’ve now learned of Bannon’s email to Stone after the start of the release of the Podesta emails on October 6, 2016-well done.

Regarding the names on Abramson’s list remember the deep ties between Stone and Manafort. When you talk about the place of Bannon in Russiagate, Abramson focuses on the part he played in the Seychelles meeting. Abramson emphasizes the close relationship between Prince and Bannon who worked on the Seychelle meeting with Michael Cohen and Felix Sater. He argues that Trump’s main foreign policy advisers in fact if not officially were Michael Flynn-who the Russians boasted of being their conduit into the Trump Russia House-and Erik Prince.

UPDATE: The Mueller Report reveals that both Bannon and Prince destroyed emails of communications regarding the Seychelles meeting.

So Abramson points out the very close relationship between Bannon and Prince

and argues that Bannon was Prince’s conduit to getting his foreign policy advice to Trump.

Abramson has more on his theory as to where Bannon and Prince fit in here. 

THREAD) The most important meeting in the Trump-Russia timeline isn’t the June ’16 meeting at Trump Tower—it’s the August 3, 2016 meeting between Don Jr., Erik Prince, an emissary from the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and Israeli intel pro Joel Zamel. I hope you’ll read on and retweet.”

This is something Abramson has long emphasized. Seen through that lens, the story of the Saudis outrageously taking out a Washington Post journalist in the Turkish embassy who was living in the United States has to bee seen in the larger context of collusion. This is something no one has begun to do yet.

Indeed, it’s clear that Trump’s IC knew at the very least the Saudis planned to kidnap Khashoggi.

Indeed, that’s where you have to start at a minimum: Trump knew and failed to warn Khashoggi. Was this simple negligence on his part? The fact that the Saudis banned him for criticizing Trump strongly  suggests it was for something worse than negligence-but complicity.

Back to Abramson’s thread. 

 

2/ George Nader was—for a long time—a recognized emissary for the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia (known as “MBS”) and the Crown Prince of the UAE (known as “MBZ”). Nader is now a cooperating witness for Bob Mueller. Erik Prince is a very close friend of the Crown Prince of the UAE.

3/ Erik Prince lives in Abu Dhabi, UAE. He falsely claimed under oath to have had no role in Trump’s campaign, but admits meeting with members of Trump’s National Security Advisory Committee—the Committee that coordinated collusion and is the beating heart of the collusion story.

Indeed, Abramson likens Trump’s National Security Advisory Committee to Nixon’s CREEP. Again, Bannon was his conduit so he knows a great deal about it. I’ve always felt-long before Wolff’s book that Bannon knew about the search for Hillary’s emails-for a dirty trickster of the alt Right like he prides himself to be to not have known about it would have reflected poorly on him.

UPDATE: Bannon later stated that the campaign was constantly inundated with material claiming to be Clinton’s emails.

Find link Mike.

And as noted above, Bannon was one of those on the email chain from Peter Smith. Regarding Smith, Abramson argues that the search Smith spearheaded to find the 33,000 emails begun much earlier than September, 2016-and that Bannon and friends were read in.

UPDATE: We now know per Mueller that the same day Trump said Russia, if you’re listening he was directing MIchael Flynn to do something to get them-Rick Gates relates that Trump was frustrated by the failure to obtain Clinton’s-nonexistent-emails.

 

Beyond Bannon’s being in Peter Smith’s email chain there’s his connection to: Joseph Schmitz. 

6/ But Prince had eyes on Trump’s National Security Advisory Committee—the equivalent, in the Russia scandal, of what “CREEP” was to Watergate—and those eyes were the eyes of Joseph Schmitz, one of the very first people Trump appointed to his National Security Advisory Committee.

7/ It’s not just that Schmitz is Prince’s friend. It’s not just that Prince was Schmitz’s mentor. Schmitz *worked for Prince* as the COO for a company of which Prince was the CEO. And Prince *admits* meeting with Schmitz during the campaign. And who knows how often he called him.

The fact that Schmidt is this close to Prince likely means Bannon also knows him very well. Schmitz for his part had approached the FBI and other intel agencies with material his client got on the dark web-he wanted the IC to figure out if the material was actually the deleted emails from Hillary’s server. 

Abramson has postulated quite logically that Schmitz’s client is none other than-Peter Smith. This makes sense as we know Smith was scouring the dark web with the help of hackers from Russian intelligence in search of these very same deleted emails. 

Then Abramson brings up Cambridge Analytica’s games. 

8/ So when Prince set up a meeting at Trump Tower between Joel Zamel—who runs the “business intelligence” firms Wikistrat and Psy Group, both of which have connections to the Israeli government via their former Israeli intel employees and Zamel himself—and Trump Jr., it was big.”

Speaking of CA, we know about Bannon’s deep connection to them. Indeed, it’s now emerged that Bannon was Alexander Nix’s boss in 2014. 

“Bannon oversaw Cambridge Analytica’s collection of Facebook data, according to former employee.”

When you’re talking about Bannon’s exposure on Russiagate, this is simply huge. A major target of the Mueller investigation into collusion is the social media campaign.

“Conservative strategist Stephen K. Bannon oversaw Cambridge Analytica’s early efforts to collect troves of Facebook data as part of an ambitious program to build detailed profiles of millions of American voters, a former employee of the data-science firm said Tuesday.

“The 2014 effort was part of a high-tech form of voter persuasion touted by the company, which under Bannon identified and tested the power of anti-establishment messages that later would emerge as central themes in President Trump’s campaign speeches, according to Chris Wylie, who left the company at the end of that year.”

Among the messages tested were “drain the swamp” and “deep state,” he said.

“Cambridge Analytica, which worked for Trump’s 2016 campaign, is now facing questions about alleged unethical practices, including charges that the firm improperly handled the data of tens of millions of Facebook users. On Tuesday, the company’s board announced that it was suspending its chief executive, Alexander Nix, after British television released secret recordings that appeared to show him talking about entrapping political opponents.”

“More than three years before he served as Trump’s chief political strategist, Bannon helped launch Cambridge Analytica with the financial backing of the wealthy Mercer family as part of a broader effort to create a populist power base. Earlier this year, the Mercers cut ties with Bannon after he was quoted making incendiary comments about Trump and his family.

“In an interview Tuesday with The Washington Post at his lawyer’s London office, Wylie said that Bannon — while he was a top executive at Cambridge Analytica and head of Breitbart News — was deeply involved in the company’s strategy and approved spending nearly $1 million to acquire data, including Facebook profiles, in 2014.”

No doubt, Bannon may try the usual trope-gee, I may have been the boss but really I had no idea what they were up to, I was just a bystander. 

But Wylie paints a very different picture:

“We had to get Bannon to approve everything at this point. Bannon was Alexander Nix’s boss,” said Wylie, who was Cambridge Analytica’s research director. “Alexander Nix didn’t have the authority to spend that much money without approval.”

So there are a number of avenues of Bannon’s involvement in Russiagate: the Erik Prince avenue, the Peter Smith email chain avenue, the Roger Stone-‘well done!’ Avenue,  and then there’s the Cambridge Analytics Avenue. And we haven’t even discussed his and Prince’s fomenting fake news from the rogue Trump supporting FBI agents after the rogue agents forced Comey’s hand.

But that’s the other side of Watergate 2.0-Comeygate.

Here’s another  avenue for Bannon’s Russiagate exposure:

It turns out that Ahmed Al-Rumaih also made an offer to Bannon-according to a good friend of Bannon’s.

Ok so according to his friend, Jeff Kwatinez-aka the inventor of a ‘3 on 3’ basketball league-Bannon turned down the money. Al-Rumaihi does clearly imply that Flynn didn’t. But even if Bannon turned it down-we don’t know if he did or not based on this-it’s clear that he has some very relevant information on this too.

But there’s yet another avenue of Bannon’s Russia exposure: the Carter Page avenue. 

“FBI surveillance of Carter Page might have picked up Bannon”

“The former Trump campaign adviser says he spoke to Trump aide Steve Bannon about Russia in January 2017, at a time when the FBI had a controversial warrant to monitor Page’s communications.”

I love the way the media obediently calls it ‘controversial’ because the arch obstructors cum Trump loyalists in the GOP House attack it. What ought to be controversial is the GOP’s shocking obstruction of the most important investigation in American history-as our democratic legitimacy itself is in doubt.

“The FBI was monitoring Carter Page when the former Trump campaign adviser says he spoke with Trump adviser Steve Bannon about Russia in January 2017, raising the strong possibility that the FBI intercepted a conversation between the two men.”

Page told Congress in November about the call. But it has been cast into a new light by last week’s release of a Republican memo revealing that the FBI was monitoring Page’s communications at the time.”

“If Page was using one of his standard phones, it was probably picked up,” said Elizabeth Goitein, a former Justice Department trial attorney and congressional counsel who co-directs the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty and National Security Program.

In the warped Devin Nunes-Bob Goodlatte-Lindsay Graham world that’s a bad thing. We’d be better of not knowing that Bannon at the time sitting on Trump’s NSC-where he could easily funnel information to Erik Prince-tried to quiet a potential witness for political reasons-ergo, to protect Trump.

“In November testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, Page told lawmakers that Bannon called him sometime shortly before Trump’s Jan. 21, 2017 inauguration, asking him to cancel a planned television appearance on that day. By then the former investment banker and energy consultant had long been exiled from the Trump orbit following reports that he was under investigation for ties to Moscow.”

“Page said that he then brought up an explosive private intelligence dossier, published online a few days earlier, which alleged the Kremlin had compromising information on Trump and worked with his campaign to influence the election.”

“Page has at times proven an unreliable narrator — his account of the details of the call appeared to shift as he discussed it with lawmakers — and the existence of the call cannot be independently confirmed.”

Page says the Bannon call, which he described as “brief,” occurred as Trump’s transition team was reeling from the dossier’s Jan. 11 publication by BuzzFeed.

Page is ‘unreliable’ to say the least. I simply don’t believe he remembers so little from this call.

UPDATE:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mitchprothero/how-a-putin-ally-met-key-trump-officials-and-worried#.udKzb2LE3

In any case it’s certainly not hard to see how Mueller was able to speak to Bannon for 20 hours. Indeed, you begin to worry that 20 hours may not have been nearly enough.

Bannon spoke with Mueller for at least another 30 hours subsequently 

As for Wolff you’d think after both becoming a person of interest for Mueller and being excommunicated from #TeamTreasonTrump Bannon would have been done with Wolff but if so you’d have thought wrong.

He again essentially co ghost wrote another tome with Wolff that promises to be even better than the first.

While Bannon melodramatically declared nothing will ever come between us Trump clearly will never speak to him again.

Bannon gave out lots of-rather dubious-2018 campaign advice but Trump wasn’t listening-but Trump’s ‘strategy’ was no better than anything Bannon came up with and suffered the worst loss since Watergate 1974.

But if he really wanted any chance of getting back in with Trump what he told Wolff this time has killed it once and for all. 

President Donald Trump’s former chief strategist believes a thorough investigation will reveal his family business is a “semi-criminal enterprise” — and ultimately end his presidency.

The president is fighting congressional orders to turn over his tax returns, putting Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin in possible legal peril, and former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon said Trump has every reason to fear their release, according to excerpts from a new book reported by The Guardian.

“Trump was vulnerable because for 40 years he had run what increasingly seemed to resemble a semi-criminal enterprise,” wrote author Michael Wolff in his forthcoming book, “Siege.”

Bannon, who is quoted extensively in this book and Wolff’s previous White House tell-all, “Fire and Fury,” takes that even further.

“I think we can drop the ‘semi’ part,” Bannon told Wolff.

Just in case you had any doubt that Bannon not only has no compunction but is happy to punch Trump right in the gut again and again-metaphorically speaking of course-he was notably the first Trump associate to heed the House Judiciary’s clarion call for documents-rushing off 2668 pages to Nadler within a day. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

License

October 28, 2016: a Day That Will Live in Infamy Copyright © by . All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book