CIRCLING THE DRAIN:

Given the outrageous conduct of Putin and Deripaska, and given the almost unanimous votes in Congress to impose tough sanctions, these accommodations should have been considered stunning. As of Tuesday night, they stink to high heaven.

And the question must be raised: Was there a quid pro quo understanding between Vekselberg and Trump associates in January 2017? It is crucial to remember here what was happening in December 2016 and January 2017 in regards to Russia sanctions. Here's what I summarized in an earlier Slate piece on Kushner, Qatar, and Russian money: The Steele Dossier alleged that Russians had made a deal with Trump associates for the Russians to sell Rosneft, the massive state energy company, and use the commissions to give Trump associates payments under the radar, in return for lifting or softening sanctions. The Rosneft sale went through in December 2016, a month after the election, coinciding with Jared Kushner, Michael Flynn, and Carter Page's various alleged communications with Russians. Just eight days before this oil megadeal, Flynn and Kushner met Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak at Trump Tower, and Kushner reportedly proposed a secret communication link with the Kremlin through the Russian embassy. Then, a few days after the Rosneft deal, Kushner met Sergey Gorkov, chair of Russia's government-owned VE Bank (VEB) and Putin's close confidant.

Analysts have described VEB as Putin's "private slush fund," a source of money independent from official Russia budgeting. VEB is under strict U.S. sanctions.

Gorkov reportedly flew to Japan to meet with Putin practically immediately. On Dec. 29, President Obama ordered new Russian sanctions for election hacking and interference--and Flynn reportedly had five calls with Kislyak. We later learned that they discussed Russian sanctions after Flynn pled guilty to lying about this fact to federal investigators. Trump tweeted about Putin the next day, calling him "very smart" for not responding to Obama's sanctions before Trump has had a chance to transition into office.

We've now learned, in the very next month after the Kushner/Flynn backchannel contacts with Russia, the Vekselberg-connected payments to Cohen began. And they occurred, inexplicably enough, after the Steele Dossier was published. Again, this is all clearly now a subject of Mueller's probe. As the New York Times first reported last week, Mueller's agents questioned Vekselberg when he flew into New York earlier this year. CNN reported on Tuesday that they asked him about these particular payments. What might be the plausible innocent explanation for a Putin-associated Russian oligarch, to use Rudy Giuliani's phrase, "funneling" money to Trump's personal lawyer through a fund used to pay hush money to one or more women and as that oligarch was due to benefit from Trump's sanction policies? Maybe they have an explanation, but it's hard to imagine it, and it's hard to imagine how persuasive a jury would find it.

The Avenatti document, meanwhile, suggests a road map for trying to substantiate this hypothetical. The first part of Avenatti's summary offers more detail for the allegation that Cohen may have committed bank fraud, misrepresenting the reasons for opening his bank account. I've explained in an earlier piece how this is one of several federal and state crimes that Cohen is potentially facing. He is also still on the hook for possible campaign finance felonies, even if one accepts all of Giuliani's spin about reimbursement. Furthermore, Avenatti suggests that California has jurisdiction over these possible crimes, opening up another set of state and federal prosecutors who could potentially bring charges. Which is all just to say, there is more pressure on Cohen to cooperate with Mueller and other prosecutors than ever. If he were to flip, he would presumably have to provide insight into what these payments were for.

Tweet   @brothersjudd