There are two legal version of events relating to George Papadopoulos.

One from the July 28, 2017 Affidavit signed by FBI Agent Robert M. Gibbs (Gibbs Version). Gibbs notes this interview is recorded. It is not clear that Gibbs is conducting the interview. There are at least two FBI Agents present.

One from October 5, 2017 Statement of the Offense signed by Robert Mueller – undersigned by Jeannie S. Rhee, Andrew D. Goldstein and Aaron S.J. Zelinsky – The Special Counsel’s Office (Mueller Version).

To the casual eye these documents appear to provide a relatively similar version of events. But there are some differences.

There are some other, more important differences as well. A somewhat confusing and potentially less important one first.

On March 24 2016, Papadopoulos, Mifsud, Olga Polonskaya meet in a London cafe. Polonskaya is introduced as “Putin’s niece”. There may or may not be a fourth person.

Mueller Version:

PAPADOPOULOS emailed the Campaign Supervisor and several members of the Campaign’s foreign policy team and stated that he had just met with his “good friend” the Professor, who had introduced him to the Female Russian National (described by defendant PAPADOPOULOS in the email as “Putin’s niece”) and the Russian Ambassador in London.{1}

Footnote 1: Defendant PAPADOPOULOS later learned that the Female Russian National was not in fact a relative of President Putin. In addition, while defendant PAPADOPOULOS expected that the Professor and the Female Russian National would introduce him to the Russian Ambassador in London, they never did.

It’s somewhat odd that no true clarification of the “Russian Ambassador” occurs. Was it Polonskaya pretending to be both roles. Was there a fourth party assuming the Russian Ambassador role. Perhaps there was no fourth party present – simply a promise of a future meeting.

Gibbs Version:

Papadopoulos emailed Campaign officials that he had “just finished a very productive lunch with a good friend of mine [Foreign Contact 1]… – who introduced me to both Putin’s niece and the Russian Ambassador in London – who also acts as the Deputy Foreign Minister.”

The Gibbs Version does not provide further clarification on the possible fourth person but note the language:

who introduced me to both Putin’s niece and the Russian Ambassador in London – who also acts as the Deputy Foreign Minister.”

The only other reference to the Russian Ambassador in Gibbs’ Version is a slightly confusing one on page 9 that could be read as either a contradiction or a clarification. The date of the conversation is April 11, 2016:

“I think a good step would be for me to meet with the Russian Ambassador in London sometime this month.” and that PAPADOPOULOS would “like to discuss with him, or anyone else you recommend, about a foreign policy trip to Russia.”

This somewhat confusing presentation may be nothing more than braggadocio by Papadopoulos in his email to the Trump Campaign. He may have never met the Russian Ambassador. There might be no fourth party.

Papadopoulos may have met someone he thought was the Russian Ambassador – and later discovered this was false. Or, Papadopoulos may have actually met the Russian Ambassador.

But nowhere in either document – other than the Mueller footnote – is Papadopoulos’ “Russian Ambassador” assertion challenged.

From here, things stay reasonably similar through June 1, 2016. There are some discrepancies but most appear to be of emphasis.

The Mueller Version has a tendency to emphasize the Russian contacts and adds additional language but this is probably to be expected.

The Gibbs Version presents events as “False statements to Foreign Contact 1” and then “False Statements to Foreign Contact 3”. Given overlap, one needs to jump back and forth.

However, after June 1, 2016, the Mueller Version suddenly becomes vague in relation to any direct foreign contact by Papadopoulos:

From mid-June through mid-August 2016, PAPADOPOULOS pursued an “off the record” meeting between one or more Campaign representatives and “members of president putin’s office and the mfa.”

The Mueller Version provides the following single example. This segment directly follows the above quoted portion and is portrayed in full:

For example, on or about June 19, 2016, after several email and Skype exchanges with the Russian MFA Connection, defendant PAPADOPOULOS emailed the High­-Ranking Campaign Official, with the subject line “New message from Russia”: “The Russian ministry of foreign affairs messaged and said that if Mr. Trump is unable to make it to Russia, if a campaign rep (me or someone else) can make it for meetings? I am willing to make the trip off the record if it’s in the interest of Mr. Trump and the campaign to meet specific people.”

After several weeks of further communications regarding a potential “off the record” meeting with Russian officials, on or about August 15, 2016, the Campaign Supervisor told defendant PAPADOPOULOS that ” I would encourage you” and another foreign policy advisor to the Campaign to “make the trip, if it is feasible.”

The trip proposed by defendant PAPADOPOULOS did not take place.

The only other reference to events after June 1, 2016 in the Mueller Version is this reference to Papadopoulos’ Facebook account deletion:

On or about February 17, 2017, defendant PAPADOPOULOS deactivated his Facebook account, which he had maintained since approximately August 2005 and which contained information about communications he had with the Professor and the Russian MFA Connection. Shortly after he deactivated his account, PAPADOPOULOS created a new Facebook account that did not contain the communications with the Professor and the Russian MFA Connection.

The Gibbs Version contains a bit more information for this period. Recall Foreign Contact 1 is Mifsud. Foreign Contact 2 is Ivan Timofeev:

On or about July 14, 2016, PAPADOPOULOS emailed Foreign Contact 2 and proposed a “meeting for August or September in the UK (London) with me and my national chairman, and maybe one other foreign policy advisor and you, members of president putin’s office and the mfa to hold a day of consultations and to meet one another. It has been approved from our side.”

On or about July 15, 2016, PAPADOPOULOS sent a private Facebook message to a Facebook account identified with Foreign Contact 2, stating: “We can chat on this, this weekend if you can’t tonight.” Foreign Contact 2 messaged back a Facebook “thumbs up.”

On or about July 21, 2016, PAPADOPOULOS sent another private Facebook message to Foreign Contact 2 stating: “How are things [Foreign Contact 2]? Keep an eye on the speech tonight. Should be good.”

On or about July 22, 2016, PAPADOPOULOS messaged Foreign Contact 2 on Facebook to ask whether Foreign Contact 2 knew a particular individual with extensive ties to Russian-based businesses and persons. PAPADOPOULOS asked Foreign Contact 2 “[i]f you know any background of him that is noteworthy before I see him, kindly send my way.”

On or about October 1, 2016, PAPADOPOULOS sent Foreign Contact 1 a private Facebook message with a link to an article from Interfax.com, a Russian news website. This evidence contradicts PAPADOPOULOS ‘s statement to the Agents when interviewed on or about January 27, 2017, that he had not been “messaging” with Foreign Contact I during the campaign while “with Trump.”

It is the July 22, 2016 interaction we are specifically concerned with:

On or about July 22, 2016, PAPADOPOULOS messaged Foreign Contact 2 on Facebook to ask whether Foreign Contact 2 knew a particular individual with extensive ties to Russian-based businesses and persons. PAPADOPOULOS asked Foreign Contact 2 “[i]f you know any background of him that is noteworthy before I see him, kindly send my way.”

Why is it that these series of contacts were detailed in the Gibbs Version but were specifically excluded from the Mueller Version. A recent article may provide the answer.

Chuck Ross at the Daily Caller has been doing fantastic work. From his June 7, 2018 article, Papadopoulos Was Approached By ‘Highly Suspicious’ Businessmen, His Wife Claims.

Papadopoulos’ wife, is now drawing attention to two other encounters that Papadopoulos has had over the past two years that she considers “highly suspicious.” One of those contacts offered to pay Papadopoulos $30,000 a month while he worked inside the Trump administration, she told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

One of the people who has raised red flags is Sergei Millian, a Belarus-born businessman who is alleged to be a major source for the infamous Steele dossier. Papadopoulos also had a mysterious encounter with an Israeli national on the Greek island of Mykonos, Mangiante, who married Papadopoulos in March, said.

Here’s where it gets particularly interesting:

Mangiante, an Italian national, confirmed to TheDCNF that Millian is the individual Papadopoulos described in a July 22, 2016 Facebook message that is cited in documents the special counsel’s office released in October.

Papadopoulos and Millian met days after the July 22, 2016 Facebook message, said Mangiante, who has recently denied that Papadopoulos was engaged in collusion with Russians.

Mangiante also said that Papadopoulos and Millian met multiple times in Chicago and New York City before the election. In one encounter in Chicago, Millian offered Papadopoulos a substantial sum of money as part of an energy-related business deal.

The catch was that Millian said Papadopoulos would have to remain in the Trump administration while carrying out the work.

The Wall Street Journal has reported on Millian as being both Source D and E in the Steele Dossier:

Sergei Millian, a 38-year-old American citizen who has claimed he helped market Trump properties to Russian buyers, wasn’t a direct source for the 35-page dossier, this person said. Rather, his statements about the Trump-Russia relationship were relayed by at least one third party to the British ex-spy who prepared the dossier, the person said.

Among the unverified allegations of Mr. Millian’s that an intermediary passed along, the person said: The claim that the Russians had compromising video of Mr. Trump that could be used to blackmail him, and a claim that there was a “conspiracy of cooperation” between the Trump camp and Russian leadership that involved hacking the computers of Mr. Trump’s Democratic opponents.

In the dossier, the source believed to be Mr. Millian is referred to at various times as both Source D and Source E and is cited as somebody “speaking in confidence to a compatriot” or “speaking in confidence to a trusted associate.”

There are all kinds of questions surrounding Millian. The fact that he was meeting with Papadopoulos in July 2016 is material.

So why did the Mueller Team specifically ignore this entire sequence of events in their October 5, 2017 unsealed Statement of Offense:

From mid-June through mid-August 2016, PAPADOPOULOS pursued an “off the record” meeting between one or more Campaign representatives and “members of president putin’s office and the mfa.”

They provided plenty of detail elsewhere. But not for this specific period of time. Almost like they didn’t want these specific details noticed.

Which is strange – because there was plenty going on:

June 19 2016 – Papadopoulos emailed the High­-Ranking Campaign Official, with the subject line “New message from Russia” – I am willing to make the trip off the record if it’s in the interest of Mr. Trump and the campaign to meet specific people.”

July 14 2016 – Papadopoulos emailed Timofeev and proposed a “meeting for August or September in the UK (London) with me and my national chairman, and maybe one other foreign policy advisor and you, members of president putin’s office and the mfa.”

July 15 2016 – Papadopoulos sent a private Facebook message to a Facebook account identified with Timofeev.

July 21 2016 – Papadopoulos sent another private Facebook message to Timofeev.

July 22 2016 – DNC emails released.

July 22 2016 – Papadopoulos messaged Timofeev [Foreign Contact 2] on Facebook to ask whether Timofeev [Foreign Contact 2] knew a particular individual with extensive ties to Russian-based businesses and persons. Papadopoulos asked Timofeev [Foreign Contact 2] “[i]f you know any background of him that is noteworthy before I see him, kindly send my way.” The referenced individual is Sergei Millian.

Papadopoulos asked Timofeev [Foreign Contact 2] “[i]f you know any background of him that is noteworthy before I see him, kindly send my way.” The referenced individual is Sergei Millian. July 22 2016 – Australia supposedly tells FBI of Papadopoulos/Downer meeting – this is the stated point at which Papadopoulos lands on FBI’s radar. Note: Kim Strassel has reported that Downer passed the information directly to the US Embassy in London.

~July 23-25 2016 – Papadopoulos meets with Sergei Millian. This meeting appears nowhere in either legal document relating to the Papadopoulos case.

July 31 2016 – FBI opens Counterintelligence Investigation.

August 1-August 15 2016 – Papadopoulos continues to communicate with Trump Campaign officials regarding a potential “off the record” meeting with Russian officials. There are probably foreign contacts made during this time but no details are disclosed in either legal document.

September 2 2016 – Halper contacts Papadopoulos – offering to pay him to write a paper and inviting him to London. Papadopoulos does so later that month, receiving $3,000 in payment.

Papadopoulos sets up a meeting with Sergei Millian. Papadopoulos asks his contact from Mifsud, Timofeev, if he knows anything about Millian.

That same day Australia supposedly tells the FBI of Papadopoulos’ comments. Which somehow serves as the basis for the FBI’s Counterintelligence Investigation.

Papadopoulos meets with Millian somewhere around July 23-25, 2016.

Second or even third-hand comments from Millian have already made their way into the Steele Dossier, forming some of the most outlandish bits of the document. Additional information stemming from Millian will make its way into later Dossier Memos as well:

Millian…wasn’t a direct source for the 35-page dossier. His statements about the Trump-Russia relationship were relayed by at least one third party to the British ex-spy who prepared the dossier.

The Papadopoulos/Millian meeting is not referenced directly in either the Mueller Version or the Gibbs Version. Despite Millian’s Russian background and vague ties to Trump.

One would assume this meeting would have been of intense focus.

The Mueller Team’s version of events:

From mid-June through mid-August 2016, PAPADOPOULOS pursued an “off the record” meeting between one or more Campaign representatives and “members of president putin’s office and the mfa.”

One other meeting also left out of both sets of legal documents: The May 10, 2016 Alexander Downing meeting with Papadopoulos.

Papadopoulos tells Downer “the Russians might use material that they have on Hillary Clinton in the lead-up to the election, which may be damaging”. Per Downer, emails are not mentioned.

This whole thing stinks. All of it and everyone involved.

Enhanced Papadopoulos timeline:

newer post The President’s Press Conference & the Real Initiation of the Leak Investigation

older post Update to the Inspector General Report Release