Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Skepticism and critical thinking is not panacea, but can help to understand the world better

Final report of Special prosecutor Mueller is a failed hatchet job: disingenuous and dishonest

Nunes aptly named Mueller final report "Mueller dossier", as it not that different from Steele dossier

 "The foreign country that worked feverishly to meddle in the 2016 Presidential election and the subsequent rule of Donald Trump is the United Kingdom. Russia is the patsy." ~Larry C Johnson

News Russiagate -- a color revolution against Trump Recommended Links Russiagate: Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition Post-Russiagate remorse -- the second Iraq WDM fiasco John "911 Coverup" Mueller Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool Attempts to entrap Trump Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections
Big Obstruction of Justice debate Infiltration of Trump campaign Joseph Misfud and MI6 connection to Russiagate Carter Page Infiltration of Trump campaign Stephan Halper and attempts to entrap members of Trump team Andrew McCabe and his close circle of "fighters with organized crime" Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit Susan Rice unmasking campaign as an attempt to derail Trump by Obama administration
Strzokgate Steele dossier Brennan elections machinations "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Anti Trump Hysteria MSM as attack dogs of color revolution Fake News scare and US NeoMcCartyism
Obama administration participation in the intelligence services putsch against Trump Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Color revolutions Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Rosenstein and appointment of the special prosecutor DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin Hillary Clinton email scandal History of American False Flag Operations
Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few Trump vs. Deep State Internet research agency story as fiasco of Russiagate Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit The Real War on Reality Media as a weapon of mass deception Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Two Party System as polyarchy National Security State
US and British media are servants of security apparatus MSM as fake news industry Media-Military-Industrial Complex Neoconservatism New American Militarism Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite
 

The Seekers abandoned their jobs, possessions, and spouses to wait for the flying saucer, but neither the aliens nor the apocalypse arrived. After several uncomfortable hours on the appointed day, Martin received a “message” saying that the group “had spread so much light that God had saved the world from destruction.” The group responded by proselytizing with a renewed vigour. According to Festinger, they resolved the intense conflict between reality and prophecy by seeking safety in numbers. “If more people can be persuaded that the system of belief is correct, then clearly, it must, after all, be correct.”

... [for members of the cult] "prophecies, per se, almost never fail. They are instead component parts of a complex and interwoven belief system which tends to be very resilient to challenge from outsiders. While the rest of us might focus on the accuracy of an isolated claim as a test of a group’s legitimacy, those who are part of that group—and already accept its whole theology—may not be troubled by what seems to them like a minor mismatch. A few people might abandon the group, typically the newest or least-committed adherents, but the vast majority experience little cognitive dissonance and so make only minor adjustments to their beliefs. They carry on, often feeling more spiritually enriched as a result.

Slate "

"FullOfSchiff" people should be viewed as the members of a new hardcore cult of "Russian collision"


Introduction

Interestingly, the same neocon/neolib alliance which endorsed George W. Bush's case for war with Iraq is pretty much the same alliance that is now, all these years later organized neo-McCartyism campaign against Russia. Including the same cast of characters reading from the Iraq-war era playbook. 

While Muleer report definitely represents far from anything like an objective investigation (which would lead to investigation of GB and Israeli influence on us elections) but a hatchet job, the most amazing feature of the report is primitivism of treatment of the subject. Mueller essentially wastes those 30 millions his team have spent -- 90% of his report could be written based on MSM stories without spending a dime, and represent the same fiction that neoliberal MSM were pushing. 

I have an impression that the report was written like a low quality fake. Some pages can be cited in Onion directly, because facts completely contradict them.

That joke is the the Muller report is similar to the introduction of a keynote speaker in the small business conference, who was presented  as an extremely successful businessman which business growing and selling potatoes in Maine netter him $250,000. After a long introduction the man got to the podium and said "Before I begin I must set the record straight. What was said about my business is only partially true. first it was not Maine , but Texas. Also it was oil not potatoes. But it was a loss not a profit.".

Moon of Alabama has a nice summary of the problems with the report:

While 448-page Mueller report found no conspiracy between Donald Trump's campaign and Russia, it offered voluminous details to support the sweeping conclusion that the Kremlin worked to secure Trump's victory. The report claims that the interference operation occurred "principally" on two fronts: Russian military intelligence officers hacked and leaked embarrassing Democratic Party documents, and a government-linked troll farm orchestrated a sophisticated and far-reaching social media campaign that denigrated Hillary Clinton and promoted Trump.

But a close examination of the report shows that none of those headline assertions are supported by the report’s evidence or other publicly available sources.They are further undercut by investigative shortcomings and the conflicts of interest of key players involved: 

Mueller's statements after the repost of issued  constitute reprehensible innuendo, which confirm that his main tasks was to create conditions to impeach Trump:

Ort | May 29, 2019 2:11:50 PM | 1

As B. notes, both this oblique negative "clarification" and Mueller's implication that his hands were tied by DOJ regulations amounts to a reprehensible attempt to signal that the institutional anti-Trump "Resistance" should vigorously pursue stitching up Trump despite Mueller's own inability to do so.

It's like a tag-team marathon lynching, and the odious Mueller is handing off the baton to his teammates in malfeasance.

It's not exactly a selfless act on Mueller's part, either. If Trump is prematurely removed from office, or sufficiently slandered to a point that renders him unelectable, Mueller and his corrupt associates will claim vindication.

The whole Mueller investigation was probably the "insurance" about which Strzok talked to Lisa Page. With previous important (and completely fraudulent) step of issuing of Brennan's handpicked analysts so called 17 agencies memo, which gave the official start of Russiagate witch hunt. See realclearpolitics.com, 2017/07/06 ).  It was based on also completely fraudulent Steele dossier and Crowdstrike analysis of DNC hack (which actually was an internal leak; Russian was just scapegoated to whitewash DNC criminal derailing of Sanders candidacy in favour of Hillary Clinton  )

Russiagate main goal was to preserve money flows to military-industrial complex which would be engaged by detente with Russia. It also was a clear attempt to entrap Trump as well as unleash neo-McCarthyism hysteria to patch cracks in the neoliberal facade, when  the establishment candidate (Hillary) was so hated by the US population that it lost general election to a newcomer. As such it is criminal conspiracy by intelligence agencies, and first of all CIA, FBI, and MI6 (with Ukrainian, Australian, Estonian,  and several other agencies in supporting roles): 

likbez , April 20, 2019 1:12 pm

Arne,

April 20, 2019 11:15 am

"Do you understand that you implicate Obama administration"

They did screw up.

Wrong. The fact that they did not warn/brief Trump suggests that this was an a deliberate and pre-planned attempt to entrap him by initiating Russian contacts by FBI/CIA/MI6 moles

We have some cursory evidence of at least four attempts to link Trump to Russians supposedly conducted by intelligence services ( https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/russiagate/ ):

  1. Moscow Trump Tower set up (via FBI mole Felix Saters), https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/04/the-fbi-tried-and-failed-to-entrap-trump-by-larry-c-johnson.html
  2. DNC email setup (via CIA and FBI contractor Crowdstrike ) https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/04/test-it-yourself-the-2-second-rounding-fact-pattern-in-the-dnc-emails-by-william-binney-and-larry-jo.html
  3. Veselnitskaya Trump tower meeting set up (via MI6 mole Rob Goldstone). https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/04/httpstruepunditcomexclusive-six-u-s-agencies-conspired-to-illegally-wiretap-trump-british-intel-used-as-fr.html
  4. Papadopoulos set up ( via Josef Misfud (MI6) and Stefan Halper (CIA) ). At the time Halper probably was reporting to the current CIA director Gina Haspel who was at this time CIA station chief in GB. She is a Brennan protégé, of recent Skripals dead ducks hoax fame.

Surveillance was specifically established to collect compromising material on Trump and his associates with high level official in Obama administration (and probably Obama himself) playing coordinating role.

Colonel Lang's blog is a good source of information on those issues with posts by former intelligence specialists.

And please note that I am not a Trump supporter. I resent him and his policies.

In a way, all political analysis which favors either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party is inherently worthless, because both parties are parts of a single neoliberal Swap and exist in service of the US led neoliberal empire. If you can't see that the entire system is one unified block of neoliberal corruption and that ordinary people need to come together and unite against it, then you really don't understand what you're looking at.

Trump is definitely proved to be one of the most dangerous, impulsive and incompetent President (in the pocket of Israel lobby and neocons). In many way  he reminds me Bush II (Bolton and Pompeo would be at home in Bush Ii administration) .

But that does not mean than RussiaGate witch hunt was justified.  Israel (via Adelson, Kushner (and connected to him Hassid mafia, which is turn is rumored to be connected to Mossad))  can be implicated in trying to influence the elections.  That's given. After all Trump is probably the most pro-Israel President out of the last ten (Johnson might come close).  Look at the NYT cartoon -- it is pretty accurate.  I see nothing anti-Semitic in it:  https://www.jpost.com/International/New-York-Times-internationally-prints-antisemitic-cartoon-of-Trump-Netanyahu-588014

The main lesson from Mueller investigation is the level of control of the Deep state of all branches of the US government.  It also looks like tech millionaires are spy agencies' employee (is not Bezos a CIA guy?). Probably success for those guys was at least partially linked to their connection to the deep state.

The working hypothesis about Russiagate is that it has nothing to do with Russia. Like in case of JFK assassination US intelligence  agencies went rogue, attempted to stage a coup d'état using false flag operations. They need to be tamed. See also Do Spies Run the World, by Israel Shamir - The Unz Review

This is a pretty grip picture right out of Orwell 1984, but that's the only framework that allows all the known fact to be put logically within it. See also these books The Committee of 300 by Dr. John Coleman and The Secret Team, the CIA and its allies in control of America and the world, by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty.

There some distinct sign of "hatchet job" type of investigation, which we know from JFK assassination investigation:

So in both case American people were lied by the government. In case of Mueller there were several blatant lies which point to the "hatchet job" type of investigation. 

In reality this was British-gate and GB can and should be implicated in Russiagate too (MI6: Christopher Steele, Joseph MisfudStephan Halper).  Like shouting "sugar sugar" does not provide sweets in your mouth, shouting  "Putin, Putin, Putin"  from MSM pulpits does not implicates Russians.  Among long list of foreign powers which  tried to influence 2016 election GB is clearly No.1. Russiagate should be renamed into British-gate as MI6 and GCHQ were the key players. Althouth the role of Isreal also needs close investigation (as well as  the level of connection of Kushner to Israel government officials and the level of Lubavitchers sect connection to the Israeli Mossad)

RussiaGate was a large scale false flag operation directed against Trump and Russia. By assortment of intelligence agencies from at least three countries (the USA, GB, and Australia). With some important help from Estonia and Ukraine.

IMHO this was a large scale false flag operation directed against Trump and Russia. By assortment of intelligence agencies from at least three countries (the USA, GB, and Australia). With some important help from Estonia and Ukraine.  Some important points;

  1. Crowdstrike injected malware (probably Ukrainian in origin or taken and compiled from Vault 7)  in DNC network and then created fake Gussifer  2.0 personality specifically to blame Russia.  It was a leak not a hack
    https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRecordCorrected/comments/a9hz3q/it_is_pretty_obvious_that_guccifer2_was_a/
    https://fabiusmaximus.com/2018/01/06/secrets-untold-about-the-dnc-hack/
  2. Podesta emails hack was probably internal operation by NSA or Military intelligence. Podesta just proved to be an idiot (and pervert). Probably done from within the USA.  http://bloviatingzeppelin.net/who-hacked-dncpodesta-emails-and-why-was-it-really-the-russians/
    On Sean Hannity’s show Shaffer told Hannity that the Podesta email hack, which Democrats blamed on Russia, were actually carried out by disgruntled ex-intel officers who wanted to bring down Hillary Clinton.
    “Sean, we did it. Not me, but our guys, former members of NSA, retired intelligence officers used these tools to break in there and get the information out. That’s what the Democrats don’t want to talk about because it doesn’t fit their narrative,” said Shaffer.
  3. CIA and FBI clearly work on creating a trap for Trump to establish total surveillance on his team (and they succeed in that Trump tower was totally bugged). Papadopulus case clearly is a case of entrapment where MI6 and CIA worked together with FBI.  Carter Page was probably an FBI mole from the very beginning so entrapment of him was just a pretext for surveillance. Strzok previous worked for Mueller in Boston, so he probably was a "corrupt cop" from the very beginning.  Veselnitskaya meeting was pushed by Rob Goldstone, probably connected to MI6 and definitly connected to
  4. Muller investigation was a hatchet job desired to create "process crime"  -- attempt to create "obstruction of justice" charge for Trump in best Moscow trial style (Russian spy instead of British spy in Moscow trials).  Fortunately it can be no "obstruction of justice" is there was no initial crime to begin with and that saved Trump scalp.  Moreover Mueller in the past was connected to mafia (Boston mafia) and had sent four people to jail for murders they did not commit to cover for a Mafioso who was a FBI informant. So he has a long history of dirty tricks.

While there are valid reasons to wish Trump impeachment, Mueller or no Mueller (IMHO Trump University scam is enough; money connection with Russian-Jewish oligarchs might also be enough) any argument about Mueller probe should be considered  along with the analysis of the criminal role of Obama administration, CIA (Brennan) and MI6 in those events (essentially a color revolution staged against Trump by intelligence agencies with the full support of Clinton wing of Democratic Party and neocon Republicans like McCain).

Mueller proved to be partisan hack and he did not even try to investigate the role on MI6 and CIA in those events.  His report  does not withstand even superficial scrutiny:

tom , May 7, 2019 at 15:08

Major Mueller Report Omissions Suggest Incompetence Or A Coverup

"false claims that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia would qualify as a "principal way" in which Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

Mueller's second major oversight – which we have touched on repeatedly – is the special counsel's portrayal of Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud as a Russian agent – when available evidence suggests he may have been a Western agent.

Weeks after returning from Moscow, Mifsud – a self-described Clinton Foundation member – 'seeded' the rumor that Russia had 'dirt' on Hillary Clinton with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos on April 26, 2016, according to the Mueller report."

So we have -at least- 4 major omissions in the Mueller investigation and report:

1) the Mueller report failed to consider whether the dossier authored by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele was Russian disinformation (and Steele was not charged with lying to the FBI).

2) Mueller's portrayal of Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud as a Russian agent – when available evidence suggests he may have been a Western agent.

3) Mueller declined to talk to the VIPS, who offered evidence that the DNC servers were not hacked but content was copied onto a disk at the server's location

4) Mueller refused to hear Julian Assange, who offered evidence that it was not the Russians that had provided WikiLeaks with the emails.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-07/ilargi-mueller-never-wanted-truth

Tom , May 7, 2019 at 14:49

And it went all the way to the Top

FBI texts: Obama 'wants to know everything we're doing'

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna845531

They were spying on Trump before the election and found nothing

Lisa Page bombshell: FBI couldn't prove Trump-Russia collusion before Mueller appointment

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/hilltv/rising/406881-lisa-page-bombshell-fbi-couldnt-prove-trump-russia-collusion-before-mueller%3famp

And it was Fusion GPS that worked with the Russians not Trump

That's sedition

Can anybody explain why Mueller did not interview key players in Russiagate (Brennan, McCabe, Clapper, Obama, Assange, Steele, Gina Haspel; the latter was CIA station chief in GB at the time and probably supervised actions of  Stephan Halper and Papadopoulos entrapment (zerohedge 2018-04-04 ) and why he had chosen to rely of existing materials including most probably fraudulent CrowdStrike report about DNC hack. No respectable prosecutor would take any such material because it definitely smells very badly with falsification.

In this sense his report does not even worth the paper on which it is printed. Of may be only as a historical document about amorality and criminality of the neoliberal elite.

And any attempt to view concocted into RussiaGate event not as a false flag operation but as as something that deserve our attention (other then for researcher of the struggle for power of internal factions within the Deep State) are clearly laughable. The reason that Mueller can't go further was probably connected with Barr appointment and feeling that Barr might prosecute Mueller and his team for all "the  service to the country" they did (especially   And they are completely different from any real or attributed actions of Trump.

They are all have to do with the balance of power between different the Deep State factions including factions within CIA and FBI and NATO (foreign special interests).

And timing of the report reflects the saying "The Moor has done his duty, the Moor can go": Mueller obstructed for two years any attempt of Trump administration to pursue independent foreign policy (not that Trump really wanted anything like that as appointments of Haley, Haspel. BTW Haspel is Brennan protégé, while Pompeo and Bolton are both Adelson's protégé. 

So it is unclear why the Deep State was fighting Trump now, after he completely folded to neocons and globalists.  That's a real mystery of American Democracy.

Foreign Special Interests

 

 "The foreign country that worked feverishly to meddle in the 2016 Presidential election and the subsequent rule of Donald Trump is the United Kingdom. Russia is the patsy." ~Larry C Johnson

There is a long tail of British actions in Russiagate, some of them really equivalent  to blatant interference in the  country election. The same situation was observed during Iraq WDM hysteria:

Another, equally remarkable similarity to the period of 2002-3 is the role foreign lobbyists have played in helping to whip up a war fever. As readers will no doubt recall, Ahmed Chalabi, leader of the Iraqi National Congress, which served, in effect as an Iraqi government-in-exile, worked hand in hand with the Washington lobbying firm Black, Kelly, Scruggs & Healey (BKSH) to sell Bush's war on television and on the op-ed pages of major American newspapers.

Chalabi was also a trusted source of Judy Miller of the Times, which, in an apology to its readers on May 26, 2004, wrote : "The most prominent of the anti-Saddam campaigners, Ahmad Chalabi, has been named as an occasional source in Times articles since at least 1991, and has introduced reporters to other exiles. He became a favorite of hard-liners within the Bush administration and a paid broker of information from Iraqi exiles." The pro-war lobbying of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has also been exhaustively documented .

Though we do not know how widespread the practice has been as of yet, something similar is taking place today. Articles calling for confrontation with Russia over its alleged "hybrid war" with the West are appearing with increasing regularity . Perhaps the most egregious example of this newly popular genre appeared on Jan. 1 in Politico magazine. That essay, which claims, among many other things, that "we're in a war" with Russia comes courtesy of one Molly McKew.

McKew is seemingly qualified to make such a pronouncement because she, according to her bio on the Politico website, served as an "adviser to Georgian President Saakashvili's government from 2009-2013, and to former Moldovan Prime Minister Filat in 2014-2015." Seems reasonable enough. That is until one discovers that McKew is actually registered with the Department of Justice as a lobbyist for two anti-Russian political parties, Georgia's UMN and Moldova's PLDM.

Records show her work for the consulting firm Fianna Strategies frequently takes her to Capitol Hill to lobby U.S. Senate and Congressional staffers, as well as prominent U.S. journalists at The Washington Post and The New York Times, on behalf of her Georgian and Moldovan clients.

"The truth," writes McKew, "is that fighting a new Cold War would be in America's interest. Russia teaches us a very important lesson: losing an ideological war without a fight will ruin you as a nation. The fight is the American way." Or, put another way: the truth is that fighting a new Cold War would be in McKew's interest – but perhaps not America's.

While you wouldn't know it from the media coverage (or from reading deeply disingenuous pieces like McKew's) as things now stand, the case against Russia is far from certain. New developments are emerging almost daily. One of the latest is a report from the cyber-engineering company Wordfence, which concluded that "The IP addresses that DHS [Department of Homeland Security] provided may have been used for an attack by a state actor like Russia. But they don't appear to provide any association with Russia."

Indeed, according to Wordfence, "The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an indicator of compromise for any website."

On Jan. 4, BuzzFeed reported that, according to the DNC, the FBI never carried out a forensic examination on the email servers that were allegedly hacked by the Russian government. "The FBI," said DNC spokesman Eric Walker, "never requested access to the DNC's computer servers."

What the agency did do was rely on the findings of a private-sector, third-party vendor that was brought in by the DNC after the initial hack was discovered. In May, the company, Crowdstrike, determined that the hack was the work of the Russians. As one unnamed intelligence official told BuzzFeed, "CrowdStrike is pretty good. There's no reason to believe that anything that they have concluded is not accurate."

Perhaps not. Yet Crowdstrike is hardly a disinterested party when it comes to Russia. Crowdstrike's founder and chief technology officer, Dmitri Alperovitch , is also a senior fellow at the Washington think tank, The Atlantic Council, which has been at the forefront of escalating tensions with Russia.

As I reported in The Nation in early January , the connection between Alperovitch and the Atlantic Council is highly relevant given that the Atlantic Council is funded in part by the State Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk. In recent years, it has emerged as a leading voice calling for a new Cold War with Russia.

See Special Counsel Mueller--Disingenuous and Dishonest by Larry C Johnson for interesting details.

The US population now is brainwashed with anti-Russian propaganda for a decade or more

Historical events tend to repeat, but this time this is not a farce. The danger of WWWIII increased dramatically due  to US neocons subversive operation against their own country. They acted as lobbyists of MIC and Israel, not as responsible citizens. Here is one interesting comment from EconoSpeak blog:

likbez said...
Barkley,

For me the standard of understanding of Russian political situation is Professor Stephen Cohen.

See https://www.thenation.com/article/the-real-costs-of-russiagate/

Sorry, but despite all your bragging, you are not even close.

Politically you are aligned with neocons like Robert Kagan and Max Boot. That's a very sad situation for any academic, as they are known lobbyists of MIC. Which means that politically you are just a MIC stooge.

I despise such people. They are all intellectual pigmies, unable to see a bigger picture which is the level of threat to the human civilization. That's why I advice you no longer touch this sensitive topic. You are not intellectually equipped to analyze it. You have no solid philosophic framework and a set of ethical principles that are pre-requisites for this.

Trump current policy toward Russia is just Hillary policy with an orange wig. He acts as a neocon marionette, even more hapless marionette then Bush II.

This positions him as far from a Russian stooge as one can get. The fact that he probably took large bribes from Russian and/or Russian-Israeli oligarchs does not change this one jota.

And in view of the danger to human civilization, your peddling of Russiagate nonsense look completely inappropriate, and even stupid.

This anti-Russia fear-mongering serves to impoverish the US people (aka "deplorable) and line the pockets of "national security parasites" from the Boing to Pentagon brass, plus Israel, which actually acts as a state-based lobbyist for the US MIC.

Again, politically, Trump has proven himself to be an impulsive, stupid, and impotent neocon stooge. I now do not understand why he had run, as that means to take those huge risks of exposing your own dirty laundry and shady dealings. To take such huge risks makes sense if and only if you really want to do something good for the nation, putting yourself under fire, making a personal sacrifice for the good of the nation.

As the result of Russiagate, the Neo-McCarthyism mentality (that you fully support) have already been baked into post Mueller US political atmosphere with the huge bills being delivered to the deluded and hapless US taxpayers.

With two very powerful political factions supporting Neo-McCarthyism things will only get worse and it probably this poisonous atmosphere will last a decade or more.

The best we can hope for at this point is that we avoid a catastrophic mistake that would lead us to a war with Russia that would end the existence of the US. If not human civilization.

P.S. I also am completely disappointed with the position of Sandwichman, whom I previously respected.


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Aug 21, 2019] Solomon If Trump Declassifies These 10 Documents, Democrats Are Doomed

Highly recommended!
They are afraid to admin that a color revolution was launched to depose Trump after the elections of 2016. Essentially a coup d'état by intelligence agencies and Clinton wing of Democratic Party.
Notable quotes:
"... The 53 House Intel interviews. House Intelligence interviewed many key players in the Russia probe and asked the DNI to declassify those interviews nearly a year ago, after sending the transcripts for review last November. There are several big reveals, I'm told, including the first evidence that a lawyer tied to the Democratic National Committee had Russia-related contacts at the CIA. ..."
"... The Stefan Halper documents. It has been widely reported that European-based American academic Stefan Halper and a young assistant, Azra Turk, worked as FBI sources . ..."
"... Page/Papadopoulos exculpatory statements. Another of Nunes' five buckets, these documents purport to show what the two Trump aides were recorded telling undercover assets or captured in intercepts insisting on their innocence. Papadopoulos told me he told an FBI undercover source in September 2016 that the Trump campaign was not trying to obtain hacked Clinton documents from Russia and considered doing so to be treason. ..."
"... The 'Gang of Eight' briefing materials. These were a series of classified briefings and briefing books the FBI and DOJ provided key leaders in Congress in the summer of 2018 that identify shortcomings in the Russia collusion narrative. ..."
"... The Steele spreadsheet. I wrote recently that the FBI kept a spreadsheet on the accuracy and reliability of every claim in the Steele dossier. According to my sources, it showed as much as 90 percent of the claims could not be corroborated, were debunked or turned out to be open-source internet rumors. ..."
"... The Steele interview. It has been reported, and confirmed, that the DOJ's inspector general (IG) interviewed the former British intelligence operative for as long as 16 hours about his contacts with the FBI while working with Clinton's opposition research firm, Fusion GPS. It is clear from documents already forced into the public view by lawsuits that Steele admitted in the fall of 2016 that he was desperate to defeat Trump ..."
"... The redacted sections of the third FISA renewal application. This was the last of four FISA warrants targeting the Trump campaign; it was renewed in June 2017 after special counsel Robert Mueller 's probe had started, and signed by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein . It is the one FISA application that House Republicans have repeatedly asked to be released, and I'm told the big reveal in the currently redacted sections of the application is that it contained both misleading information and evidence of intrusive tactics used by the U.S. government to infiltrate Trump's orbit. ..."
"... Records of allies' assistance. Multiple sources have said a handful of U.S. allies overseas – possibly Great Britain, Australia and Italy – were asked to assist FBI efforts to check on Trump connections to Russia. ..."
"... Attorney General Bill Barr's recent comments that "the use of foreign intelligence capabilities and counterintelligence capabilities against an American political campaign, to me, is unprecedented and it's a serious red line that's been crossed." ..."
Aug 21, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

As the Russiagate circus attempts to quietly disappear over the horizon, with Democrats preferring to shift the anti-Trump narrative back to "racist", "white supremacist", "xenophobe", and the mainstream media ready to squawk "recession"; the Trump administration may have a few more cards up its sleeve before anyone claims the higher ground in this farce we call an election campaign.

As The Hill's John Solomon details, in September 2018 that President Trump told my Hill.TV colleague Buck Sexton and me that he would order the release of all classified documents showing what the FBI, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other U.S. intelligence agencies may have done wrong in the Russia probe.

And while it's been almost a year since then, of feet-dragging and cajoling and deep-state-fighting, we wonder, given Solomon's revelations below, if the president is getting ready to play his 'Trump' card.

Here are the documents that Solomon believes have the greatest chance of rocking Washington, if declassified:

1.) Christopher Steele 's confidential human source reports at the FBI. These documents, known in bureau parlance as 1023 reports, show exactly what transpired each time Steele and his FBI handlers met in the summer and fall of 2016 to discuss his anti-Trump dossier. The big reveal, my sources say, could be the first evidence that the FBI shared sensitive information with Steele, such as the existence of the classified Crossfire Hurricane operation targeting the Trump campaign. It would be a huge discovery if the FBI fed Trump-Russia intel to Steele in the midst of an election, especially when his ultimate opposition-research client was Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The FBI has released only one or two of these reports under FOIA lawsuits and they were 100 percent redacted. The American public deserves better.

2.) The 53 House Intel interviews. House Intelligence interviewed many key players in the Russia probe and asked the DNI to declassify those interviews nearly a year ago, after sending the transcripts for review last November. There are several big reveals, I'm told, including the first evidence that a lawyer tied to the Democratic National Committee had Russia-related contacts at the CIA.

3.) The Stefan Halper documents. It has been widely reported that European-based American academic Stefan Halper and a young assistant, Azra Turk, worked as FBI sources . We know for sure that one or both had contact with targeted Trump aides like Carter Page and George Papadopoulos at the end of the election. My sources tell me there may be other documents showing Halper continued working his way to the top of Trump's transition and administration, eventually reaching senior advisers like Peter Navarro inside the White House in summer 2017. These documents would show what intelligence agencies worked with Halper, who directed his activity, how much he was paid and how long his contacts with Trump officials were directed by the U.S. government's Russia probe.

4.) The October 2016 FBI email chain. This is a key document identified by Rep. Nunes and his investigators. My sources say it will show exactly what concerns the FBI knew about and discussed with DOJ about using Steele's dossier and other evidence to support a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant targeting the Trump campaign in October 2016. If those concerns weren't shared with FISA judges who approved the warrant, there could be major repercussions.

5.) Page/Papadopoulos exculpatory statements. Another of Nunes' five buckets, these documents purport to show what the two Trump aides were recorded telling undercover assets or captured in intercepts insisting on their innocence. Papadopoulos told me he told an FBI undercover source in September 2016 that the Trump campaign was not trying to obtain hacked Clinton documents from Russia and considered doing so to be treason. If he made that statement with the FBI monitoring, and it was not disclosed to the FISA court, it could be another case of FBI or DOJ misconduct.

6.) The 'Gang of Eight' briefing materials. These were a series of classified briefings and briefing books the FBI and DOJ provided key leaders in Congress in the summer of 2018 that identify shortcomings in the Russia collusion narrative. Of all the documents congressional leaders were shown, this is most frequently cited to me in private as having changed the minds of lawmakers who weren't initially convinced of FISA abuses or FBI irregularities.

7.) The Steele spreadsheet. I wrote recently that the FBI kept a spreadsheet on the accuracy and reliability of every claim in the Steele dossier. According to my sources, it showed as much as 90 percent of the claims could not be corroborated, were debunked or turned out to be open-source internet rumors. Given Steele's own effort to leak intel in his dossier to the media before Election Day, the public deserves to see the FBI's final analysis of his credibility. A document I reviewed recently showed the FBI described Steele's information as only "minimally corroborated" and the bureau's confidence in him as "medium."

8.) The Steele interview. It has been reported, and confirmed, that the DOJ's inspector general (IG) interviewed the former British intelligence operative for as long as 16 hours about his contacts with the FBI while working with Clinton's opposition research firm, Fusion GPS. It is clear from documents already forced into the public view by lawsuits that Steele admitted in the fall of 2016 that he was desperate to defeat Trump , had a political deadline to make his dirt public, was working for the DNC/Clinton campaign and was leaking to the news media. If he told that to the FBI and it wasn't disclosed to the FISA court, there could be serious repercussions.

9.) The redacted sections of the third FISA renewal application. This was the last of four FISA warrants targeting the Trump campaign; it was renewed in June 2017 after special counsel Robert Mueller 's probe had started, and signed by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein . It is the one FISA application that House Republicans have repeatedly asked to be released, and I'm told the big reveal in the currently redacted sections of the application is that it contained both misleading information and evidence of intrusive tactics used by the U.S. government to infiltrate Trump's orbit.

10.) Records of allies' assistance. Multiple sources have said a handful of U.S. allies overseas – possibly Great Britain, Australia and Italy – were asked to assist FBI efforts to check on Trump connections to Russia. Members of Congress have searched recently for some key contact documents with British intelligence . My sources say these documents might help explain Attorney General Bill Barr's recent comments that "the use of foreign intelligence capabilities and counterintelligence capabilities against an American political campaign, to me, is unprecedented and it's a serious red line that's been crossed."

These documents, when declassified, would show more completely how a routine counterintelligence probe was hijacked to turn the most awesome spy powers in America against a presidential nominee in what was essentially a political dirty trick orchestrated by Democrats.


rahrog , 2 minutes ago link

America's Ruling Class is laughing at all you fools still falling for the Rs v Ds scam.

Stupid people lose.

LibertyVibe , 3 minutes ago link

I disagree with Solomon. Nothing will "doom" the swamp unless the righteous few are willing to indict, prosecute and carry out sentencing for the guilty. Exposing the guilty accomplishes nothing, because anyone paying attention already knows of their crimes. Those who want to believe lies will still believe them after the truth comes out.
It's ALL A WASTE OF TIME unless we follow through.

#TheDailyNews #DrainTheSwamp

Lord Raglan , 5 minutes ago link

Where's all the other, earlier docs Trump was going to declassify? Just wondering..............

TheFQ , 16 minutes ago link

Does anyone see a pattern here after the 2009 Tea Party movement began?

2009 - Republicans: "If we win back the House, we can accomplish our agenda."

2011 - Republicans: "If we win back the Senate, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: After winning back the House)

2012 - Republicans: "If we win back the Senate, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: 2 YEARS After winning back the House)

2013 - Republicans: "If we win back the Presidency, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: 1 YEAR after winning back the House and the Senate)

2014 - Republicans: "If we win back the Presidency, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: 2 YEARS after winning back the House and the Senate)

2015 - Republicans: "If we win back the Presidency, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: 3 YEARS after winning back the House and the Senate)

2016 - Republicans: "If we win back the Presidency, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: 4 YEARS after winning back the House and the Senate)

2017 - Republicans: "Now that we've won back the Presidency, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: After winning back the House 6 YEARS AGO and the Senate 4 YEARS AGO)

2018 - Republicans: "Now that we've won back the Presidency, we can accomplish our agenda." (NOTE: After winning back the House 7 YEARS AGO and the Senate 5 YEARS AGO)

2019 - John Solomon - "If Trump Declassifies These 10 Documents, Democrats Are Doomed"

I hate to say it, but I DON'T BELIEVE YOU, JOHN.

ALL WE HAVE HEARD OVER THE COURSE OF THIS DECADE IS "IF THIS HAPPENS...THEN THEY ARE DOOMED / WE CAN ACCOMPLISH OUR AGENDA / YADDA YADDA YADDA.

WHEN THE FOLLOWING ARE FOUND GUILTY OF TREASON, THEN AND ONLY THEN WILL I BELIEVE YOU:

WHY ARE THESE TREASONOUS, VILE, CORRUPT CRIMINALS NOT INDICTED FOR TREASON?

WTF?

FFS...

benb , 12 minutes ago link

WHY ARE THESE TREASONOUS, VILE, CORRUPT CRIMINALS NOT INDICTED FOR TREASON?

Because the people doing the indicting are in on it.

enfield0916 , 36 minutes ago link

As if there's any major philosophical difference between the Librtads and Zionist Cocksuckvatives.

Both sides use the .gov agencies to subvert and ignore the Constitution whenever possible. Best example is WikiLeaks and how each party wished Assange would just go away when he revealed damaging information about both sides on multiple occasions.

[Aug 20, 2019] Tulsi A Living Reminder of Iraq s Liars and Apologists by David Masciotra

Notable quotes:
"... Gabbard calls out the betrayers; Dems try to forget their heroes Mueller and Biden are among them. ..."
"... The gains of war in Iraq remain elusive, especially considering that the justifications for invasion -- weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein's connection to al-Qaeda, the ambition to create a Western-style democracy at gunpoint -- remain "murky at best." That's a quote from the 9/11 Commission's conclusion on the so-called evidence linking Iraq to Osama bin Laden's group, which actually did carry out the worst terrorist attack in American history. ..."
"... As far as stupid and barbarous decisions are concerned, it is difficult to top the war in Iraq. It is also difficult to match its price tag, which, according to a recent Brown University study, amounts to $1.1 trillion. ..."
"... Gore Vidal once christened his country the "United States of Amnesia," explaining that Americans live in a perpetual state of a hangover: "Every morning we wake up having forgotten what happened the night before." ..."
"... The war in Iraq ended only nine years ago, but it might as well have never taken place, given the curious lack of acknowledgement in our press and political debates. As families mourn their children, babies are born with irreversible deformities, and veterans dread trying to sleep through the night, America's political class, many of whom sold the war to the public, have moved on. When they address Iraq at all, they act as though they have committed a minor error, as though large-scale death and destruction are the equivalent of a poor shot in golf when the course rules allow for mulligans. ..."
"... As the Robert Mueller fiasco smolders out, it is damning that the Democratic Party, in its zest and zeal to welcome any critical assessment of Trump's unethical behavior, has barely mentioned that Mueller, in his previous role as director of the FBI, played a small but significant role in convincing the country to go to war in Iraq. ..."
"... Mueller testified to Congress that "Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program poses a clear threat to our national security." He also warned that Saddam could "supply terrorists with radiological material" for the purposes of devising a nuclear bomb. Leaving aside any speculation about Mueller's intentions and assuming he had only the best of motives, it is quite bizarre, even dangerous, to treat as oracular someone who was wrong on such a life-or-death question. ..."
"... The former vice president now claims that his "only mistake was trusting the Bush administration," implying he was tricked into supporting the war. This line is not as persuasive as he imagines. First, it raises the question -- can't we nominate someone who wasn't tricked? Second, its logic crumbles in the face of Biden's recent decision to hire Nicholas Burns, former U.S. ambassador to NATO, as his campaign's foreign policy advisor. Burns was also a vociferous supporter of the war. An enterprising reporter should ask Biden whether Burns was also tricked. Is the Biden campaign an assembly of rubes? ..."
"... Instead, the press is likelier to interrogate Biden over his holding hands and giving hugs to women at public events. Criticism of Biden's "inappropriate touching" has become so strident that the candidate had to record a video to explain his behavior. The moral standards of America's political culture seem to rate kissing a woman on the back of the head as a graver offense than catastrophic war. ..."
Aug 02, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Gabbard calls out the betrayers; Dems try to forget their heroes Mueller and Biden are among them.

Estimates of the number of civilians who died during the war in Iraq range from 151,000 to 655,000. An additional 4,491 American military personnel perished in the war. Mozhgan Savabieasfahani, toxicologist at the University of Michigan, has organized several research expeditions to Iraq to measure the contamination and pollution still poisoning the air and water supply from the tons of munitions dropped during the war. It does not require any expertise to assume what the studies confirm: disease is still widespread and birth defects are gruesomely common. Back home, it is difficult to measure just how many struggle with critical injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder.

The gains of war in Iraq remain elusive, especially considering that the justifications for invasion -- weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein's connection to al-Qaeda, the ambition to create a Western-style democracy at gunpoint -- remain "murky at best." That's a quote from the 9/11 Commission's conclusion on the so-called evidence linking Iraq to Osama bin Laden's group, which actually did carry out the worst terrorist attack in American history.

As far as stupid and barbarous decisions are concerned, it is difficult to top the war in Iraq. It is also difficult to match its price tag, which, according to a recent Brown University study, amounts to $1.1 trillion.

Gore Vidal once christened his country the "United States of Amnesia," explaining that Americans live in a perpetual state of a hangover: "Every morning we wake up having forgotten what happened the night before."

The war in Iraq ended only nine years ago, but it might as well have never taken place, given the curious lack of acknowledgement in our press and political debates. As families mourn their children, babies are born with irreversible deformities, and veterans dread trying to sleep through the night, America's political class, many of whom sold the war to the public, have moved on. When they address Iraq at all, they act as though they have committed a minor error, as though large-scale death and destruction are the equivalent of a poor shot in golf when the course rules allow for mulligans.

As the Robert Mueller fiasco smolders out, it is damning that the Democratic Party, in its zest and zeal to welcome any critical assessment of Trump's unethical behavior, has barely mentioned that Mueller, in his previous role as director of the FBI, played a small but significant role in convincing the country to go to war in Iraq.

Mueller testified to Congress that "Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program poses a clear threat to our national security." He also warned that Saddam could "supply terrorists with radiological material" for the purposes of devising a nuclear bomb. Leaving aside any speculation about Mueller's intentions and assuming he had only the best of motives, it is quite bizarre, even dangerous, to treat as oracular someone who was wrong on such a life-or-death question.

Far worse than the worship of Mueller is the refusal to scrutinize the abysmal foreign policy record of Joe Biden, currently the frontrunner in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Of the Democrats in the Senate at that time, Biden was the most enthusiastic of the cheerleaders for war, waving his pompoms and cartwheeling in rhythm to Dick Cheney's music. Biden said repeatedly that America had "no choice but to eliminate the threat" posed by Saddam Hussein. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, his blustering was uniquely influential.

The former vice president now claims that his "only mistake was trusting the Bush administration," implying he was tricked into supporting the war. This line is not as persuasive as he imagines. First, it raises the question -- can't we nominate someone who wasn't tricked? Second, its logic crumbles in the face of Biden's recent decision to hire Nicholas Burns, former U.S. ambassador to NATO, as his campaign's foreign policy advisor. Burns was also a vociferous supporter of the war. An enterprising reporter should ask Biden whether Burns was also tricked. Is the Biden campaign an assembly of rubes?

Instead, the press is likelier to interrogate Biden over his holding hands and giving hugs to women at public events. Criticism of Biden's "inappropriate touching" has become so strident that the candidate had to record a video to explain his behavior. The moral standards of America's political culture seem to rate kissing a woman on the back of the head as a graver offense than catastrophic war.

Polling well below Biden in the race is the congresswoman from Hawaii, Tulsi Gabbard. She alone on the Democratic stage has made criticism of American militarism central to her candidacy. A veteran of the Iraq war and a highly decorated major in the Hawaii Army National Guard, Gabbard offers an intelligent and humane perspective on foreign affairs. She's called the regime change philosophy "disastrous," advocated for negotiation with hostile foreign powers, and backed a reduction in drone strikes. She pledges if she becomes president to end American involvement in Afghanistan.

When Chris Matthews asked Gabbard about Biden's support for the Iraq war, she said, "It was the wrong vote. People like myself, who enlisted after 9/11 because of the terrorist attacks, were lied to. We were betrayed."

Her moral clarity is rare in the political fog of the presidential circus. She cautions against accepting the "guise of humanitarian justification for war," and notes that rarely does the American government bomb and invade a country to actually advance freedom or protect human rights.

Gabbard's positions are vastly superior to that of the other young veteran in the race, Pete Buttigieg. The mayor of South Bend recently told New York that one of his favorite novels is The Quiet American , saying that its author, Graham Greene, "points out the dangers of well-intentioned interventions."

Buttigieg's chances of winning the nomination seem low, and his prospects of becoming a literary critic appear even lower. The Quiet American does much more than raise questions about interventions: it is a merciless condemnation of American exceptionalism and its attendant indifference to Vietnamese suffering.

Americans hoping for peace won't find much comfort in the current White House either. President Trump has made the world more dangerous by trashing the Iran nuclear deal, and his appointment of John Bolton, a man who makes Donald Rumsfeld look like Mahatma Gandhi, as national security advisor is certainly alarming.

America's willful ignorance when it comes to the use of its own military exposes the moral bankruptcy at the heart of its political culture. Even worse, it makes future wars all but inevitable.

If no one can remember a war that ended merely nine years ago, and there's little room for Tulsi Gabbard in the Democratic primary, how will the country react the next time a president, and the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declare that they have no choice but to remove a threat?

Norman Solomon, journalist and founder of the Institute for Public Accuracy, knows the answer to that question. He provides it in the title of his book on how the media treats American foreign policy decisions: War Made Easy .

David Masciotra is the author of four books, including Mellencamp: American Troubadour (University Press of Kentucky) and Barack Obama: Invisible Man (Eyewear Publishing).

MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR

Walter a day ago

Where ae the people who told us that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? Should they be tried for lying to the American public? 4500 troops killed and over $1.1 TRILLION wasted with no good results .With hundreds of thousands of Iraq's killed. .
Clyde Schechter Walter a day ago
Where are they, indeed? They are still running US foreign policy; that's where they are. They are pundits in all the major media; that's where they are.

I cannot even imagine what historians will say about the uncanny persistence of these charlatans' influence in this era after a consistent record of disastrous, abysmal misadventures.

JeffK from PA Walter 17 hours ago
You don't have to look too hard to find them. Bolton, Pompeo, and other neocons are hiding in plain sight. The Military Industrial Complex is embedded in our foreign policy like a tick on a dog.
Sid Finster JeffK from PA 13 hours ago
Why not start with Bush and Blair?
IanDakar Sid Finster 10 hours ago
Because you'd be knocking out a storm trooper instead of the emperor, at least as far as Bush goes. Same for why the focus is on Bolton rather than simply Trump.

I CAN see an argument that Trump/Bush knew what they were doing when they brought those people in though. f you feel that way and see it more of an owner of a hostile attack dog then yeah, you'd want to include those two too.

JeffK from PA Sid Finster 10 hours ago
Cheney. Pure evil.
Sid Finster Walter 13 hours ago
Nuremberg provides an instructive precedent. Start at the top with Bush and Blair keep going on down.
Disqus10021 Sid Finster 11 hours ago
Recommended viewing: the 1961 movie "Judgment at Nuremberg".
L Walter 12 hours ago
One might wonder where that intelligence was gathered, and then maybe we could find out why these wars have been happening.
Alex (the one that likes Ike) a day ago
Here stands Tulsi. A woman, who, unlike their conventional troupe, can win this election. They reject her because... what? Moar war? She's not the member of the Cult? Or it's simply some sort of collective political death wish?
Anonne Alex (the one that likes Ike) 12 hours ago
They reject her because she had the temerity to speak truth to power and supported Bernie Sanders in the 2016 race. She stepped down from her position as Vice Chair of the DNC to endorse Sanders. She has real courage, and earned their wrath. She's not perfect but she's braver and stronger than almost the entire field. Only Bernie is on par.
Alex (the one that likes Ike) Anonne 9 hours ago
And Bernie is the one they also hate, maybe a little bit less openly. Thus they reject those who can win the election. It's either a self-destructiveness or they think that it's better to keep on losing than to rebuild the party into what it needs to be.
Nelson Alex (the one that likes Ike) 8 hours ago
What do you mean "they"? Anyone is free to support her campaign.
former-vet a day ago • edited
Democrats and the Republican establishment, both, love war. It wasn't a coincidence that Hillary Clinton chose Madeleine Albright to be a keynote speaker at "her" party convention ("we think the deaths of a half million children are worth it"). Liberals know that there isn't really any "free" free, and that taxing the rich won't match their dreams -- it is the blood and bones of innocent foreigners that must pay for their lust. Establishment Republicans are more straightforward: they simply profit off the death and destruction.

This is why Trump is being destroyed, and why Tulsi is attacked. If only "she" (the one who gloated over Khameni's murder) had been elected, we'd be in a proxy war with Russia now! A real war with Iran! This is what the American people want, and what they'll likely get when they vote another chicken-hawk in come 2020.

Sid Finster former-vet 13 hours ago
Agree, except that Trump is not governing as a non-interventionist.

About the only thing one can say is that his is a slightly less reckless militarist than what the political class in this country wants.

Nelson former-vet 8 hours ago
Khameni is still alive. You're thinking of Gaddafi.
Fayez Abedaziz a day ago
Tulsi, like Sanders is a 'danger' to everything Israel wants.
So, all...all the main 'news' networks and online sites don't like them and give more coverage to the same old Dem bull peddlers like ignorant Booker and the lousy opportunist low IQ Kamala Harris and Gillibrand.
TomG 17 hours ago • edited
Manafort and his ilk can be tried and convicted for their lies. I guess if the lie is big enough we grant a pass on any need for prosecution. Justice for all? I don't think so.

Max Blumenthal posted a powerful piece at Consortium News (7/31/2019) about Biden's central and south American mis-adventures. Biden still extols his own policies however disastrous. The hubris of the man is worse than nauseating.

Great article, Mr. Masciotra.

OrvilleBerry 14 hours ago
Whether one thinks Gabbard has a shot at the nomination or not, it's important to keep her on the stage in the next round of debates. Go to Tulsi2020.com and give her just one dollar (or more if you can)
so she has enough unique contributors to make the next round. And if you get polled,early on give her your vote.
Strawman 12 hours ago
The moral standards of America's political culture seem to rate kissing a woman on the back of the head as a graver offense than catastrophic war.

Perfectly encapsulates the collective puerility of the American electorate. Thomas Jefferson must be spinning in his grave.

Disqus10021 12 hours ago • edited
The total US costs related to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are expected to be considerably larger than $1.1 trillion, according to this study:
https://www.hks.harvard.edu...
Try $4-$6 trillion, according to the author of the study.

Long after I, Andrew Bacevitch and Hillary Clinton have gone to our reward, there will still be thousands of wounded warriors from these US Middle East adventures dependent on VA benefits for their survival and competing with civilian seniors for government handouts. A war with Iran would make the US fiscal situation that much worse.

The religious folks who were so anxious to protect family values only a few years ago seem to have their heads in the sand when it comes to the financial future of today's young Americans.

A few weeks ago, I made a token contribution to Tulsi Gabbard's campaign to help her qualify for the July Democratic debates. She will need more new contributors to qualify for the next round of debates.

david 12 hours ago
"The war in Iraq ended only nine years ago,..."

Ahh..., really? So why do we still have over 5000 soldiers in Iraq?

christopher kelly police ret. 11 hours ago
Tulsi was marvelous in knocking out Harris.
Zsuzsi Kruska 10 hours ago
Tulsi hasn't a chance of the nomination, but she's exposing things and maybe more people will get a clue about what's really going on with American lives and taxes being squandered for the profit of the few who benefit from these atrocities and wars abroad, done in the name of all Americans.
Eric 10 hours ago
Donated my $3 to Tulsi yesterday. She's the only Democrat I would vote for and she needs to stay in this race as long as possible.
Steve Naidamast 10 hours ago
Being a supporter of Tulsi Gabbard for the very reasons that the author writes, has me agreeing with everything he has promoted in his piece.

However, to answer his own question as to why Americans are lured into commenting on such innocuous and foolish things in such an important election such as Biden's touching of women, is answered by the author's own prose.

He states that Americans are only provided such nonsense from the press that is monitoring the election process. What else can people talk about? And even if many Americans are clearheaded enough to understand the charade of the current Democratic debates, what or who will actually provide legitimate coverage with the exception of online sites as the American Conservative, among others?

If most Americans were actually thinking individuals, Tulsi Gabbard would be a shoo-in for the presidency in 2020. However, given the two factors of a highly corrupted mainstream press and too many Americans not studying enough civics to understand what is going on around them, it is highly unlikely that Tulsi Gabbard will even get close to the possibility of being nominated...

JeffK from PA 10 hours ago
Cheney, mentioned in the article, was pure evil. I voted for GB2 for two reasons. 1) He was a very good Texas governor. He actually got anti-tax Texas to raise taxes dedicated to support education, in return for stricter standards for teachers. A good trade since Texas public schools were awful. 2) Dick Cheney. I thought he was the adult in the room that would provide steady and reliable guidance for Bush.

Boy was I wrong about Cheney. "Deficits don't matter". Just watch the movie Vice. Christian Bale does an incredible job portraying the pure evil of Cheney and the Military Industrial Complex. The movie is chilling to watch. And it is basically true. Politifact does a good job of scoring the accuracy of Cheney's role in the Bush administration as portrayed in the movie.

https://www.politifact.com/...

Mccormick47 10 hours ago
The trouble is, Conservatives promoting Gabbard and Williamson as their preferred candidates poisons their chances of staying in the race.
Mark Thomason 9 hours ago
I remember a friend of mine, a proud Marine, saying before the Iraq War, "Well, they better find some WMD for all this."

They didn't. That should matter.

[Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson

Highly recommended!
Former Ukrainian presidential candidate Yulia Tymoshenko trace to Steele dossier is a real shocker.
Notable quotes:
"... On December 5, 2016, Bruce Ohr emailed himself an Excel spreadsheet, seemingly from his wife Nellie Ohr, titled " WhosWho19Sept2016 ." The spreadsheet purports to show relationship descriptions and "linkages" between Donald Trump, his family and criminal figures, many of whom were Russians. ..."
"... If you want to have more fun, search the pdf using the term "BAYROCK." You will discover that Nellie Ohr, like a female Don Quixote, is searching desperately to link Trump and Sater to dirty Russian money. What she does not suspect is that Sater was being used, via his company Bayrock, to try to gain access to Russians who were potential targets of the FBI. ..."
"... What is not emphasized in the piece, and it is something I want to direct you to, is that the idea or impetus to launch the investigation of Butina came courtesy of Christopher Steele, who was relaying rumor and conjecture to Bruce Ohr. ..."
"... FBI Director Christopher Wray reminds me of one of the workers in the bowels of the Titanic who was furiously shoveling coal into the doomed boilers of the sinking ship. The FBI, like the Titanic, is in trouble. ..."
"... It also gave immunity to all of the people on Hillary's team that participated in obstruction of justice. On that same day, Jim Comey signed off on a separate memo that decided not to prosecute Hillary Clinton. ..."
"... Larry..Fusion GPS has always refused to Reveal who where its Financial support came from... ..."
"... So..the Timeline Indicates Fusion GPS was hired by The "Washington Free Beacon" around October 2015 to background checks and Profiles of The Republican Candidates for President.and that Fusion GPS continued to do so until May 2016..when it became clear that Donald Trump clinched the Nomination.. ..."
"... I wonder why AG Barr isn't forcing the FBI to comply sooner with Judge Boasberg's ruling to hand over unredacted Comey Memos and Archey Declarations? ..."
"... So what did Barack Obama know, and when did he know it? ..."
"... Nellie Ohr was working for a privately-owned firm that had employed her to make false accusations about Trump's alleged connections to Russians in order to sabotage his presidency and lay the groundwork for his impeachment. ..."
"... They also hired foreign agent, Chris Steele to concoct a thoroughly-debunked dossier for the same purpose. ..."
"... Can these people be charged with a crime or have we entered a new world of 'dirty tricks'??? ..."
"... Examination of the Nellie Ohr documents given to the FBI shows some of her source material also came from former Ukrainian presidential candidate Yulia Tymoshenko and a lawsuit she filed against Manafort. ..."
"... So, Bruce Ohr became a conduit of information not only for intelligence from Clinton's British opposition-researcher but also from his wife's curation of evidence from a Clinton foreign ally and Manafort enemy inside Ukraine. Talk about foreign influence in a U.S. election! ..."
"... The lines between government officials and informants, unverified political dirt and real intelligence, personal interest and law enforcement, became too blurred for the Justice Department's own good. ..."
Aug 17, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

There are many moving pieces in the drama surrounding the Deep State attempt to kill the Trump Presidency. God Bless Judicial Watch. I think most of the key evidence that has surfaced came courtesy of Tom Fitton, Chris Farrell and their team of tireless workers.

I want to bring you back to Mr. Felix Sater . He was part of Bayrock, which worked closely with Donald Trump's organization and, most importantly of all, was an FBI Confidential Human Source since December of 1998.

Thanks to Judicial Watch we have a new dump of Bruce Ohr emails, which include several from his wife, Nellie. There are 330 pages to wade thru (you can see them here ). There is one item in particular I encourage you to look at:

On December 5, 2016, Bruce Ohr emailed himself an Excel spreadsheet, seemingly from his wife Nellie Ohr, titled " WhosWho19Sept2016 ." The spreadsheet purports to show relationship descriptions and "linkages" between Donald Trump, his family and criminal figures, many of whom were Russians. This list of individuals allegedly "linked to Trump" include: a Russian involved in a "gangland killing;" an Uzbek mafia don; a former KGB officer suspected in the murder of Paul Tatum; a Russian who reportedly "buys up banks and pumps them dry"; a Russian money launderer for Sergei Magnitsky; a Turk accused of shipping oil for ISIS; a couple who lent their name to the Trump Institute, promoting its "get-rich-quick schemes"; a man who poured him a drink; and others.

The spreadsheet starts on page 301. If you search the document for the name Felix Sater, he will pop up. Now here is the curious and, I suppose, reassuring thing about this document--Nellie Ohr did not have a clue that Felix Sater was an active FBI informant. We can at least give the FBI credit for protecting Sater's identity from Nellie Ohr and, more importantly, her husband, DOJ official Bruce Ohr.

If you want to have more fun, search the pdf using the term "BAYROCK." You will discover that Nellie Ohr, like a female Don Quixote, is searching desperately to link Trump and Sater to dirty Russian money. What she does not suspect is that Sater was being used, via his company Bayrock, to try to gain access to Russians who were potential targets of the FBI.

One point is clear--she uncovered no evidence implicating Trump working with the Russians, either thru Felix Sater or one of the other "suspects" she exhaustively listed.

Shifting gears, there are two very important pieces recently posted at The Conservative Tree House that I encourage you to read:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/08/12/quirky-angle-overstock-ceo-patrick-byrne-2016-fbi-activity-was-political-espionage/#more-168122 https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/08/12/federal-judge-completely-rejects-doj-argument-orders-archey-declarations-descriptions-of-comey-memosreleased/ The first piece focuses on CEO Patrick Byrne and the role he played in trying to entrap and portray Marina Butina as a Russian agent.

What is not emphasized in the piece, and it is something I want to direct you to, is that the idea or impetus to launch the investigation of Butina came courtesy of Christopher Steele, who was relaying rumor and conjecture to Bruce Ohr.

You can find this information in the Bruce Ohr 302s that Judicial Watch also secured. Marina Butina was unfairly and unjustly portrayed and prosecuted as a Russian intelligence agent. It was a damn lie.

I do not ever want to hear another American complaining about an American State Department or CIA employee who is entrapped and unfairly prosecuted in Russia.

We have done the same damn thing that we have accused the Soviets of doing. The same thing. It is shameful.

The second piece is the ultimate feel good piece. Kudos to its author, Sundance.

He details how a Federal Judge, infuriated by the FBIs stupidity and mendacity, tells the Bureau to go pound sand. The FBI is frantically trying to prevent the Archey Declarations from being revealed thanks to a lawsuit brought by CNN (finally, CNN did something right).

The Archey Declarations provide a detailed description of the memos written and illegally removed from FBI Headquarters by that sanctimonious twit, Jim Comey. More shoes will be dropping in the coming days.

It appears that Inspector General Horowitz is going to present at least one report on Jim Comey and one report on the FISA abuse by the FBI.

FBI Director Christopher Wray reminds me of one of the workers in the bowels of the Titanic who was furiously shoveling coal into the doomed boilers of the sinking ship. The FBI, like the Titanic, is in trouble.

Finally, Gateway Pundit's Joe Hoft put up an important piece today ( see here ). Here is the bottomline, and keep this in mind as you read the piece, on June 20, 2016 the FBI signed off on a deal with Hillary Clinton's attorney's that gave Hillary's team the right to destroy computers and emails.

It also gave immunity to all of the people on Hillary's team that participated in obstruction of justice. On that same day, Jim Comey signed off on a separate memo that decided not to prosecute Hillary Clinton.

The fix was in more than a month before Jim Comey appeared on camera to try to explain why he was not recommending prosecution of Hillary for putting Top Secret information on her unclassified server.

Jim Comey lied when he declared that could not prove "intent."

I am sure that those of you who have never held a clearance and handled Top Secret material probably believed that lie.

But anyone who knows how the TS system is set up knows that the ONLY WAY, I repeat, the ONLY WAY to put TS material on an unclassified server is to do so intentionally. There is no way to do this mistakenly.


Jim Ticehurst said in reply to Jim Ticehurst... ,

Larry..Fusion GPS has always refused to Reveal who where its Financial support came from...

So..the Timeline Indicates Fusion GPS was hired by The "Washington Free Beacon" around October 2015 to background checks and Profiles of The Republican Candidates for President.and that Fusion GPS continued to do so until May 2016..when it became clear that Donald Trump clinched the Nomination..

creating Phase 2..Operations..

"The Washington Free Beacon ".Has an Editor in Chief ..who is William Kristols Son In Law..And William Kristols ..Father....Irving Kristol..is Called..."the God Father of Neo Conservatism". William Kristol..was a John McCain supporter..

Thus Fusion GPS..retained Nellie Ohr..(strangly..NO Wiki Profile) who apparently had to Use her husbnd Bruce Ohrs Clearances,,to continue Her Collaberation with Fusion GPS..

By June 2016 the Strategy was to bring in Christopher Steele..who was know to Bruce Ohr back to 2006.. Strange.. NO early life BIOS for Bruce or Nellie Ohr..

Jack , 16 August 2019 at 01:38 AM
Larry

Do you believe the current DOJ under Barr will really investigate and convene a grand jury to hear testimony from Comey, Brennan and Clapper?

And what do you make of the fact that Epstein who was on suicide watch either was murdered or killed himself while in custody?

akaPatience , 16 August 2019 at 01:38 AM
I wonder why AG Barr isn't forcing the FBI to comply sooner with Judge Boasberg's ruling to hand over unredacted Comey Memos and Archey Declarations?

The Gateway Pundit item about the ridiculously unfair and unethical deals made in Hillary Clinton's email scandal investigation is just further proof of how the Clinton taint infected the FBI. "Crooked" is a very apt epithet, that's for sure. I'd love to know how much Bill and Hill raked in during her Sec'y. of State racketeering.

Fred , 16 August 2019 at 01:38 AM
So what did Barack Obama know, and when did he know it?
plantman , 16 August 2019 at 01:38 AM
You say: "One point is clear--she uncovered no evidence implicating Trump working with the Russians, either thru Felix Sater or one of the other "suspects" she exhaustively listed."

This is true, but it is also true that Nellie Ohr was working for a privately-owned firm that had employed her to make false accusations about Trump's alleged connections to Russians in order to sabotage his presidency and lay the groundwork for his impeachment.

They also hired foreign agent, Chris Steele to concoct a thoroughly-debunked dossier for the same purpose.

Can these people be charged with a crime or have we entered a new world of 'dirty tricks'???

Keith Harbaugh , 16 August 2019 at 01:38 AM
Let me just add this piece by John Solomon: "New evidence shows why Steele, the Ohrs and TSA workers never should have become DOJ sources" by John Solomon, 2019-08-15
...
Examination of the Nellie Ohr documents given to the FBI shows some of her source material also came from former Ukrainian presidential candidate Yulia Tymoshenko and a lawsuit she filed against Manafort.

Why is that significant? Tymoshenko and Hillary Clinton had a simpatico relationship after the former secretary of State went out of her way in January 2013 to advocate for Tymoshenko's release from prison on corruption charges.

So, Bruce Ohr became a conduit of information not only for intelligence from Clinton's British opposition-researcher but also from his wife's curation of evidence from a Clinton foreign ally and Manafort enemy inside Ukraine. Talk about foreign influence in a U.S. election!
...
The tales of Bruce and Nellie Ohr, Christopher Steele, Yulia Tymoshenko, and those DEA and TSA agents raise a stark warning:

The lines between government officials and informants, unverified political dirt and real intelligence, personal interest and law enforcement,
became too blurred for the Justice Department's own good.

That's a problem sorely in need of fixing.

oldman22 said in reply to Keith Harbaugh... 17 August 2019 at 01:16 AM

The person responsible for securing the release of Yulia Tymoshenko was Chancellor Merkel. Further, that USA opposed Tymoshenko.

quote
As for one of the leaders of the war party in Kiev, Merkel has privately and publicly endorsed every claim of Yulia Tymoshenko, promoting her release from prison and protecting her campaigns for war against Russia, even though – according to the high-level German source – “they [Chancellery, Foreign Ministry] have known for years that [Tymoshenko] was a crook.”
endquote

There is a lot more detail Tymoshenko's corruption and Merkel's rescue here:

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/02/john-helmer-the-political-motivation-of-chancellor-merkels-embrace-of-yulia-tymoshenko-and-war.html

(republished from John Helmer's website, includes a great cartoon worth viewing)

If you want more sources for this story,google
"Merkel, Tymoshenko, prison"

[Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen

Highly recommended!
Aug 17, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

STEPHEN COHEN: I'm not aware that Russia attacked Georgia. The European Commission, if you're talking about the 2008 war, the European Commission, investigating what happened, found that Georgia, which was backed by the United States, fighting with an American-built army under the control of the, shall we say, slightly unpredictable Georgian president then, Saakashvili, that he began the war by firing on Russian enclaves. And the Kremlin, which by the way was not occupied by Putin, but by Michael McFaul and Obama's best friend and reset partner then-president Dmitry Medvedev, did what any Kremlin leader, what any leader in any country would have had to do: it reacted. It sent troops across the border through the tunnel, and drove the Georgian forces out of what essentially were kind of Russian protectorate areas of Georgia.

So that- Russia didn't begin that war. And it didn't begin the one in Ukraine, either. We did that by [continents], the overthrow of the Ukrainian president in [20]14 after President Obama told Putin that he would not permit that to happen. And I think it happened within 36 hours. The Russians, like them or not, feel that they have been lied to and betrayed. They use this word, predatl'stvo, betrayal, about American policy toward Russia ever since 1991, when it wasn't just President George Bush, all the documents have been published by the National Security Archive in Washington, all the leaders of the main Western powers promised the Soviet Union that under Gorbachev, if Gorbachev would allow a reunited Germany to be NATO, NATO would not, in the famous expression, move two inches to the east.

Now NATO is sitting on Russia's borders from the Baltic to Ukraine. So Russians aren't fools, and they're good-hearted, but they become resentful. They're worried about being attacked by the United States. In fact, you read and hear in the Russian media daily, we are under attack by the United States. And this is a lot more real and meaningful than this crap that is being put out that Russia somehow attacked us in 2016. I must have been sleeping. I didn't see Pearl Harbor or 9/11 and 2016. This is reckless, dangerous, warmongering talk. It needs to stop. Russia has a better case for saying they've been attacked by us since 1991. We put our military alliance on the front door. Maybe it's not an attack, but it looks like one, feels like one. Could be one.


Disturbed Voter , July 30, 2018 at 6:32 am

Real politik. Don't bring a knife to a gun fight. Don't start fights in the first place. The idea that American leadership is any better than mid-Victorian imperialism, is laughable.

Jerri-Lynn Scofield , July 30, 2018 at 8:15 am

Here's the RNN link to part one: The Russia "National Security Crisis" is a U.S. Creation .

integer , July 30, 2018 at 7:12 am

AARON MATE: We hear, often, talk of Putin possibly being the richest person in the world as a result of his entanglement with the very corruption of Russia you're speaking about

Few appear to be aware that Bill Browder is single-handedly responsible for starting, and spreading, the rumor that Putin's net worth is $200 billion (for those who are unfamiliar with Browder, I highly recommend watching Andrei Nekrasov's documentary titled " The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes "). Browder appears to have first started this rumor early in 2015 , and has repeated it ad nauseam since then, including in his testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017 . While Browder has always framed the $200 billion figure as his own estimate, that subtle qualifier has had little effect on the media's willingness to accept it as fact.

Interestingly, during the press conference at the Helsinki Summit, Putin claimed Browder sent $400 million of ill-gotten gains to the Clinton campaign. Putin retracted the statement and claimed to have misspoke a week or so later, however by that time the $400 million figure had been cited by numerous media outlets around the world. I think it is at least possible that Putin purposely exaggerated the amount of money in question as a kind of tit-for-tat response to Browder having started the rumor about his net worth being $200 billion.

Blue Pilgrim , July 30, 2018 at 11:39 am

The stories I saw said there was a mistranslation -- but that the figure should have $400 thousand and not $400 million. Maybe Putin misspoke, but the $400,000 number is still significant, albeit far more reasonable.

Putin never was on the Forbes list of billionaires, btw, and his campaign finance statement comes to far less. It never seems to occur to rabid capitalists or crooks that not everyone is like them, placing such importance on vast fortunes, or want to be dishonest, greedy, or power hungry. Putin is only 'well off' and that seems to satisfy him just fine as he gets on with other interests, values, and goals.

integer , July 30, 2018 at 12:03 pm

Yes, $400,000 is the revised/correct figure. My having written that "Putin retracted the statement" was not the best choice of phrase. Also, the figure was corrected the day after it was made, not "a week or so later" as I wrote in my previous comment. From the Russia Insider link:

Browder's criminal group used many tax evasion methods, including offshore companies. They siphoned shares and funds from Russia worth over 1.5 billion dollars. By the way, $400,000 was transferred to the US Democratic Party's accounts from these funds. The Russian president asked us to correct his statement from yesterday. During the briefing, he said it was $400,000,000, not $400,000. Either way, it's still a significant amount of money.

JohnnyGL , July 30, 2018 at 2:54 pm

I hadn't heard about the revision/edit to the $400M, thanks!

Seems crazy to think how much Russo-phobia seems to have been ginned up by one tax-dodging hedgie with an axe to grind.

Procopius , July 31, 2018 at 1:11 am

There's something weird about the anti-Putin hysteria. Somehow, many, many people have come to believe they must demonstrate their membership in the tribe by accepting completely unsupported assertions that go against common sense.

Eureka Springs , July 30, 2018 at 7:58 am

In a sane world we the people would be furious with the Clinton campaign, especially the D party but the R's as well, our media (again), and our intel/police State (again). Holding them all accountable while making sure this tsunami of deception and lies never happens again.

It's amazing even in time of the internetz those of us who really dig can only come up with a few sane voices. It's much worse now in terms of the numbers of sane voices than it was in the run up to Iraq 2.

CenterOfGravity , July 30, 2018 at 12:52 pm

Regardless of broad access to far more information in the digital age, never under estimate the self-preservation instinct of American exceptionalist mythology. There is an inverse relationship between the decline of US global primacy and increasingly desperate quest for adventurism. Like any case of addiction, looking outward for blame/salvation is imperative in order to prevent the mirror of self-reflection/realization from turning back onto ourselves.

integer , July 30, 2018 at 9:28 am

we're not to believe we're not supposed to believe we're supposed to believe

Believe whatever you want, however your comment gives the impression that you came to this article because you felt the need to push back against anything that does not conform to the liberal international order's narrative on Putin and Russia, rather than "with an eagerness to counterbalance the media's portrayal of Putin". WRT to whataboutism, I like Greenwald's definition of the term :

"Whataboutism": the term used to bar inquiry into whether someone adheres to the moral and behavioral standards they seek to impose on everyone else. That's its functional definition.

Rojo , July 30, 2018 at 12:25 pm

Invoking "whataboutism" is a liberal team-Dem tell.

Amfortas the Hippie , July 30, 2018 at 2:20 pm

aye. I've never seen it used by anyone aside from the worst Hill Trolls.
Indeed, when it was first thrown at me, I endeavored to look it up, and found that all references to it were from Hillaryites attempting to diss apostates and heretics.

Jonathan Holland Becnel , July 30, 2018 at 8:22 pm

Eh, probably

John Oliver, whos been completely sucking lately with TDS, did a semi decent segment on Whataboutism.

Eureka Springs , July 30, 2018 at 9:52 am

The degree of consistency and or lack of hypocrisy based on words and actions separates US from Russia to an astonishing level. That is Russia's largest threat to US, our deceivers. The propaganda tables have turned and we are deceiving ourselves to points of collective insanity and warmongering with a great nuclear power while we are at it. Warmongering is who we are and what we do.

Does Russia have a GITMO, torture Chelsea Manning, openly say they want to kill Snowden and Assange? Is Russia building up arsenals on our borders while maintaining hundreds of foreign bases and conducting several wars at any given moment while constantly threatening to foment more wars? Is Russia dropping another trillion on nuclear arsenals? Is Russia forcing us to maintain such an anti democratic system and an even worse, an entirely hackable electronic voting system?

You ready to destroy the world, including your own, rather than look in the mirror?

rkka , July 30, 2018 at 9:52 am

You're talking about extending Russian military power into Europe when the military spending of NATO Europe alone exceeds Russia's by almost 5-1 (more like 12-1 when one includes the US and Canada), have about triple the number of soldiers than Russia has, and when the Russian ground forces are numerically smaller than they have been in at least 200 years?

" to put their self-interests above those of their constituents and employees, why can't we apply this same lens to Putin and his oligarchs?"

The oligarchs got their start under Yeltsin and his FreeMarketDemocraticReformers, whose policies were so catastrophic that deaths were exceeding births by almost a million a year by the late '90s, with no end in sight. Central to Yeltsin's governance was the corrupt privatization, by which means the Seven Bankers came to control the Russian economy and Russian politics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semibankirschina

Central to Putin's popularity are the measures he took to curb oligarchic predation in 2003-2005. Because of this, Russia's debt:GDP ratio went from 1.0 to about 0.2, and Russia's demographic recovery began while Western analysis were still predicting the death of Russia.

So Putin is the anti-oligarch in Russian domestic politics.

Blue Pilgrim , July 30, 2018 at 12:17 pm

"While it's true that power corrupts"

I know of many people who sacrifice their own interests for those of their children (over whom they have virtually absolute power), family member and friends. I know of others who dedicate their lives to justice, peace, the well being of their nation, the world, and other people -- people who find far greater meaning and satisfaction in this than in accumulating power or money. Other people have their own goals, such as producing art, inventing interesting things, reading and learning, and don't care two hoots about power or money as long as their immediate needs are met.

I'm cynical enough about humans without thinking the worst of everyone and every group or culture. Not everyone thinks only of nails and wants to be hammers, or are sociopaths. There are times when people are more or less forced into taking power, or getting more money, even if they don't want it, because they want to change things for the better or need to defend themselves.
There are people who get guns and learn how to use them only because they feel a need for defending themselves and family but who don't like guns and don't want to shoot anyone or anything.

There are many people who do not want to be controlled and bossed around, but neither want to boss around anyone else. The world is full of such people. If they are threatened and attacked, however, expect defensive reactions. Same as for most animals which are not predators, and even predators will generally not attack other animals if they are not hungry or threatened -- but that does not mean they are not competent or can be dangerous.

Capitalism is not only inherently predatory, but is inherently expansive without limits, with unlimited ambition for profits and control. It's intrinsically very competitive and imperialist. Capitalism is also a thing which was exported to Russia, starting soon after the Russian Revolution, which was immediately attacked and invaded by the West, and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union. Soviet Russia had it's own problems, which it met with varying degrees of success, but were quite different from the aggressive capitalism and imperialism of the US and Europe.

Not every culture and person are the same.

BenX , July 30, 2018 at 3:28 pm

The pro-Putin propaganda is pretty interesting to witness, and of course not everything Cohen says is skewed pro-Putin – that's what provides credibility. But "Putin kills everybody" is something NOBODY says (except Cohen, twice in one interview) – Putin is actually pretty selective of those he decides to have killed. But of course, he doesn't kill anyone, personally – therefore he's an innocent lamb, accidentally running Russia as a dictator.

rkka , July 31, 2018 at 9:11 am

The most recent dictator in Russian history was Boris Yeltsin, who turned tanks on his legislature while it was in the legal and constitutional process of impeaching him, and whose policies were so catastrophic for Russians (who were dying off at the rate of 900k/yr) that he had to steal his re-election because he had a 5% approval rating.

But he did as the US gvt told him, so I guess that makes him a Democrat.

Under Putin Russia recovered from being helpless, bankrupt & dying, but Russia has an independent foreign policy, so that makes Putin a dictator.

Plenue , July 30, 2018 at 3:54 pm

"Does any sane person believe that there will ever be a Putin-signed contract provided as evidence? Does any sane person believe that Putin actually needs to "approve" a contract rather than signaling to his oligarch/mafia hierarchy that he's unhappy about a newspaper or journalist's reporting?"

Why do you think Putin even needs, or feels a need, to have journalists killed in the first place? I see no evidence to support this basic assumption.

The idea of Russia poised to attack Europe is interesting, in light of the fact that they've cut their military spending by 20%. And even before that the budgets of France, Germany, and the UK combined well exceeded that of Russia, to say nothing of the rest of NATO or the US.

Putin's record speaks for itself. This again points to the absurdity of claiming he's had reporters killed: he doesn't need to. He has a vast amount of genuine public support because he's salvaged the country and pieced it back together after the pillaging of the Yeltsin years. That he himself is a corrupt oligarch I have no particular doubt of. But if he just wanted to enrich himself, he's had a very funny way of going about it. Pray tell, what are these 'other interpretations'?

"The US foreign policy has been disastrous for millions of people since world war 2. But Cohen's arguments that Russia isn't as bad as the US is just a bunch of whattaboutism."

What countries has the Russian Federation destroyed?

witters , July 31, 2018 at 1:30 am

Here is a fascinating essay ["Are We Reading Russia Right?"] by Nicolai N. Petro who currently holds the Silvia-Chandley Professorship of Peace Studies and Nonviolence at the University of Rhode Island. His books include, Ukraine
in Crisis (Routledge, 2017), Crafting Democracy (Cornell, 2004), The Rebirth of Russian Democracy (Harvard, 1995), and Russian Foreign Policy, co-authored with Alvin Z. Rubinstein (Longman, 1997). A graduate of the University of Virginia, he is the recipient of Fulbright awards to Russia and to Ukraine, as well as fellowships from the Foreign Policy Research Institute, the National Council for Eurasian and East European Research, the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies in Washington,
D.C., and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. As a Council on Foreign Relations Fellow, he served as special assistant for policy toward the Soviet Union in the U.S. Department of State from 1989 to 1990. In addition to scholarly publications
on Russia and Ukraine, he has written for Asia Times, American Interest, Boston Globe, Christian Science Monitor, The Guardian (UK), The Nation, New York Times, and Wilson Quarterly. His writings have appeared frequently on the web sites of the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs and The National Interest.

I warn you – it is terrifying!

http://npetro.net/resources/Petro-FF+Spring+2018.pdf

Carolinian , July 30, 2018 at 8:55 am

Thanks for so much for this. Great stuff. Cohen says the emperor has no clothes so naturally the empire doesn't want him on television. I believe he has been on CNN one or two times and I saw him once on the PBS Newshour where the interviewer asked skeptical questions with a pained and skeptical look. He seems to be the only prominent person willing to stand up and call bs on the Russia hate. There are plenty of pundits and commentators who do that but not many Princeton professors.

Thye Rev Kev , July 30, 2018 at 9:04 am

It has been said in recent years that the greatest failure of American foreign policy was the invasion of Iraq. I think that they are wrong. The greatest failure, in my opinion, is to push both China and Russia together into a semi-official pact against American ambitions. In the same way that the US was able to split China from the USSR back in the seventies, the best option was for America to split Russia from China and help incorporate them into the western system. The waters for that idea have been so fouled by the Russia hysteria, if not dementia, that that is no longer a possibility. I just wish that the US would stop sowing dragon's teeth – it never ends well.

NotTimothyGeithner , July 30, 2018 at 9:45 am

The best option, but the "American exceptionalists" went nuts. Also, the usual play book of stoking fears of the "yellow menace" would have been too on the nose. Americans might not buy it, and there was a whole cottage industry of "the rising China threat" except the potential consumer market place and slave labor factories stopped that from happening.

Bringing Russia into the West effectively means Europe, and I think that creates a similar dynamic to a Russian/Chinese pact. The basic problem with the EU is its led by a relatively weak but very German power which makes the EU relatively weak or controllable as long as the German electorate is relatively sedate. I think they still need the international structures run by the U.S. to maintain their dominance. What Russia and the pre-Erdogan Turkey (which was never going to be admitted to the EU) presented was significant upsets to the existing EU order with major balances to Germany which I always believed would make the EU potentially more dynamic. Every decision wouldn't require a pilgrimage to Berlin. The British were always disinterested. The French had made arrangements with Germany, and Italy is still Italy. Putting Russia or Turkey (pre-Erdogan) would have disrupted this arrangement.

John Wright , July 30, 2018 at 11:11 am

>which is oddly not easy to locate on its site

It appeared to me that Aaron Mate knew he was dealing with a weak hand by the end of the interview.

When Mate stated "it's widely held that Putin is responsible for the killing of journalists and opposition activists who oppose him."

There are many widely held beliefs in the world, and that does not make them true.

For example, It was widely held, and still may be believed by some, that Saddam Hussein was involved in the events of 9/11.

It is widely believed that humans are not responsible, in any part, for climate change.

Mate may have been embarrassed when he saw the final version and as a courtesy to him, the interview was made more difficult to find.

pretzelattack , July 30, 2018 at 11:35 am

iirc he didn't say it was true.

Elizabeth Burton , July 30, 2018 at 7:18 pm

The Crimea voted to be annexed by Russia by a clear majority. The US overran Hawaii with total disregard for the wishes of the native population. Your comparison is invalid.

vato , July 31, 2018 at 3:37 am

"Putin's finger prints are all over the Balkan fiasco".How is that with Putin only becoming president in 2000 and the Nato bombing started way beforehand. It's ridiculous to think that Putin had any major influence at that time as govenor or director of the domestic intelligence service on what was going during the bombing of NATO on Belgrad. Even Gerhard Schroeder, then chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, admitted in an interview in 2014 with a major German Newspaper (Die Zeit) that this invasion of Nato was a fault and against international law!

Can you concrete what you mean by "fingerprints" or is this just another platitudes?

ewmayer , July 31, 2018 at 6:05 pm

"Somebody called it Trump derangement syndrome."

I believe that the full and proper name of the psychiatric disorder in question is Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome [PTDS].

Symptoms include:

o Eager and uncritical ingestion and social-media regurgitation of even the most patently absurd MSM propaganda. For example, the meme that releasing factual information about actual election-meddling (as Wikileaks did about the Dem-establishment's rigging of its own nomination process in 2016) is a grave threat to American Democracy™;

o Recent-onset veneration of the intelligence agencies, whose stock in trade is spying on and lying to the American people, spreading disinformation, election rigging, torture and assassination and its agents, such as liar and perjurer Clapper and torturer Brennan;

o Rehabilitation of horrid unindicted GOP war criminals like G.W. Bush as alleged examples of "norms-respecting Republican patriots";

o Smearing of anyone who dares question the MSM-stoked hysteria as an America-hating Russian stooge.

[Aug 17, 2019] Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome (PTDS)

Highly recommended!
Aug 17, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

ewmayer , July 31, 2018 at 6:05 pm

"Somebody called it Trump derangement syndrome."

I believe that the full and proper name of the psychiatric disorder in question is Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome [PTDS].

Symptoms include:

[Aug 15, 2019] One of the many purposes of Russiagate was to misdirect people away from the fact that Trump's election represents (among other things) a huge split in the ruling class, which can roughly be described as one between extractive industries (energy, agriculture, mining, etc.) and finance, media and tech.

Aug 15, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Michael Fiorillo , , August 14, 2019 at 11:53 am

" (the) factional struggle evident in the rise of Trump "

Thank you.

One of the many purposes of Russiagate was to misdirect people away from the fact that Trump's election represents (among other things) a huge split in the ruling class, which can roughly be described as one between extractive industries (energy, agriculture, mining, etc.) and finance, media and tech. A map of the 2016 election results strongly supports this analysis. Thus, Comcast was more than happy to give free reign to Rachel Maddow's two+ years of disinfotainment

This split in the ruling class would provide an immense opportunity if the US had a real functioning Left, rather than lumpen bourgeois and childish virtue signalling about open borders and reparations.

[Aug 12, 2019] Bruce Ohr 302s by Larry C Johnson - Sic Semper Tyrannis

Highly recommended!
That suggest that FBI actions were influenced by Obama administration and CIA to much greater expent thatn we assuned.
Notable quotes:
"... It may be that much of the dossier was created out of whole cloth by Nellie Ohr who was tasked to create a narrative that jibed with Simpson's political objectives. ..."
"... The ukraine is probably behind a great deal of the "info" the democrats and fib used.. ..."
Aug 12, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

In reviewing these 302s there are some salient points I want to bring to your attention.

First, Christopher Steele was terminated as an FBI Confidential Human Source at the end of September 2016 for leaking to the press. That should have put an end to the relationship. Instead, the FBI starts using Bruce Ohr, the number four guy at the Department of Justice, as a cutout. Absolutely no justification for this kind of behavior by the FBI. It is, at a minimum, unethical and creates a real problem if any of the info collected from Ohr was to be used in a court proceeding. Something known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" would kick in and the so-called evidence proffered by Ohr would be inadmissible or unusable because of Steele's previous lies to the FBI.

Second, Glenn Simpson played a huge role in helping spread anti-Trump propaganda generated by Steele. In fact, it was Simpson's insistence on Steele speaking with the press that got Steele terminated as an FBI source.

Third, the FBI knew by mid-December 2016 that Bruce Ohr's wife, Nellie, was working with Simpson and Steele. This too should have set off alarm bells about the potential conflicts of interest and unethical conduct.

Fourth, evidence used ultimately against Paul Manafort came from Nellie Ohr. If this was not disclosed to Manafort's attorney's there is a likely Brady violation, which bolster's Manafort's prospects for an appeal.

Fifth, Steele and Simpson made several claims of fact about Russia ties to the Trump campaign that were later proven to be false. For example, stating that Michael Cohen was in Prague meeting the Russians. Important to note that Christopher Steele produced the final report of the so-called dossier bearing his name on 13 December 2016 yet this information was "passed" to Ohr one day prior to the date on the report.

Sixth, the "debriefing" of Ohr on 12 December 2016 also provided the foundation for going after Marina Butina. (See Sara Carter's excellent update on this case here ). The false information from Steele/Simpson via Bruce Ohr became the pretext for launching an investigation of Butina, who was working for a wealthy Russian banker, Alexander Torshin. This too turns out to have been a fabrication. I believe this provides Butina's attorneys more ammunition for arguing prosecutorial misconduct and failure to provide critical Brady material.

Seventh, Ohr's report that Simpson and Steele were communicating with the State Department, including Assistant Secretary Victoria Nuland and Kathleen Kavalec makes it clear that State Department was used as a front to pass on info from the questionable Steele Dossier. This information was used in the FISA warrant and provided a seemingly reliable justification for spying on Carter Page (see the Page FISA warrant here .)

And finally, Fusion GPS, which was hired on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, was regularly communicating and coordinating with Obama's Department of Justice and Department of State. This was a complete abuse of power.

Now, here is the summary of the 302s:

11/22/2016 (entered on 12/19/2006)

Ohr met with Steele in 2007 (not sure of date) at a conference.

July 30, 2016 Steele met Ohr for breakfast. Steele claimed Carter Page had met with Russian Sechin at a conference.

States that Glenn Simpson hired Steele and Ohr's wife to dig up dirt on Trump's connections to Russia.

Noted that reporting was going to the Clinton Campaign, Jonathan Winer and the FBI.

Ohr met with Steele in late September and was told about Alfa Bank ties to Trump and the Sergei Millian organization.

Noted that Steele was desperate to stop Trump and to thwart the Kremlin.

Ohr knew that Glenn Simpson and "others" were meeting with Victoria Nuland.

12/05/2016 (entered on 12/19/2016) (drafted on 12/12/2016)

Glenn Simpson directed Christopher Steele to speak to the press, including David Corn at Mother Jones.

Ohr provided FBI info on Manafort Chronology prepared by his wife.

12/12/2016 (entered on 12/19/2016) (Drafted on 12/14/2016)

Ohr states, per Simpson, that Cohen replaced Manafort and Page as the contact with the Russians.

Says that Cohen met with Russians in Prague.

Claims that Torshin is a Russian mobster and is trying to infiltrate the NRA and was pushing money to Trump.

Simpson opined that Sergei Millian was an SVR officer and a link to Trump.

12/20/2016 (entered on 12/27/2016)

Thumb drive with Nelly Ohr's research passed to FBI.

1/23/2017 (entered on 1/31/2017) (drafted on 1/25/2017)

Simpson tells Ohr a source will be outed in the coming days.

Steele claims he met with a McCain staffer prior to October 2016

1/25/017 (entered on 1/27/2017)

Ohr spoke with Steele on 25 January 2017.

1/27/2017 (entered on 1/27/2017)

Steele told Ohr he wanted to keep lines of communication open.

02/06/2017 (entered on 02/08/2017)

Ohr contacted by Steele via What'sApp on 31 January 2017. Was reacting to firing of Sally Yates. Worried that if Ohr got fired he would have no one to talk to.

"Interviewing agents asked Ohr to ask Steele if he would be comfortable getting the name of an FBI agent."

Ohr reminded agents that Steele had spoken several times prior to 2016 Presidential election with Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec. Ohr identified one of the sources for Steele's report as a Ukranian.

02/14/2017 (entered on 02/15/2017)

Ohr tells FBI about Steele's concerns about his business. Identifies other lawyer (name blacked out) he is working with. Steele is preparing a proposal to re-establish his business releationship with the FBI.

05/08/2017 (entered on 05/10/2017)

Steele tells Ohr that he is worried about Comey's upcoming testimony. Ohr tells Steele what Comey will say and Steele is "happy."

Ohr said that Glenn Simpson would be visiting Steele soon.

Jonathan Winer was bringing a letter to Steele.


walrus , 11 August 2019 at 04:43 PM

this is treason.
PRC90 , 11 August 2019 at 08:24 PM
As an aside, note the similarities between Steele and Downer. Both carried some imprimatur of credibility based on prior government service, and popped up from no where and returned to relative obscurity after producing a document that was able to be immediately misused by others for the same purpose.

I'd wondered why anyone would want to involve Downer in these events, the man is a moron. However, one of his greatest strengths is producing wonderful well written reports, and to that extent would appear to have been chosen well.

confusedponderer , 12 August 2019 at 05:52 AM
It is, however despicable the whole story is, suggesting - and in its own way entertaining - that apparently the experienced gutter lady "Eff the EU" Nuland was also involved, probably bringing in her ... regime change experience aquired in the Ukraine.

I wonder, did she ever say "Eff the Orange Man too"? Alas. Either way, more interesting to me is whether she also handed out cookies to Steel and/or Ohr?

https://orf.at/static/images/site/news/20131250/ukraine_klitschko_usa_body_a.4532409.jpg

As far as financial price of the Ohr & Steel operation goes, compared to the 5+ billion that were according to Nuland proudly poured into Ukraine to get Maidan and backstab Janukowytsch, hiring Steel to backstab somebody else - Trump - was probably way cheaper - i.e. 'however illegal, it was more economic'.

That said, I detested Nuland well before this story for her Maidan stuntery and the "Eff the EU" arrogance, but then, she really made it easy even for an at time even more benevolent observer.

Thanks for sharing and elaborating.

Patrick Armstrong , 12 August 2019 at 08:48 AM
But the big question that I would be interested to get opinions on is this:
when is all this stuff going to be revealed in a way that not even the readers of the WaPo NYT et al can deny thet the entire Russia collusion/interference story is false from beginning to end?

The longer the Russia-interfered-in-our-election-and-everybody-else's lie is perpetrated, the closer we all get to nuclear annihilation. So it's a matter of some importance.

Any ideas?
One that occurs to me is that nothing will happen -- it will all dribble out over such a long time that nothing will ever be ever dramatic and simple enough to make an effect.

My other thought is that Trump & Co wants the big explosive revelations to hit the street next Mar/Apr so as to destroy the Dems in 2020.

But many of us have known the general outline of the conspiracy for a couple of years, but nothing big ever hits the street and the lies get dug in a little deeper every day that they're not exploded.

turcopolier , 12 August 2019 at 09:02 AM
PA

Unless there are a lot of indictments none of this will matter.

plantman , 12 August 2019 at 11:39 AM
So, state department honchos--Victoria Nuland, Kavalec and Sally Yates (DOJ)--all had some knowledge of what was going on, right? And so did national security advisor Susan Rice.

Doesn't that prove that Obama must have been in the loop?

I think it does.

Second, how much of Nellie Ohr's russia research actually ended up in the steele dossier? I think that it is very unlikely that Chris Steele maintained his sketchy connections in Russia after the seismic political changes in the early 2000s. It may be that much of the dossier was created out of whole cloth by Nellie Ohr who was tasked to create a narrative that jibed with Simpson's political objectives.

notamusedobserver -> plantman... , 12 August 2019 at 04:42 PM
The ukraine is probably behind a great deal of the "info" the democrats and fib used..

[Aug 12, 2019] Russiagate is the idea around which varied interests can be organized

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Like the Wolfowitz explanation of the Iraq War, Russiagate is the idea around which varied interests can be organized. Cold Warriors like to hate on Russia. It justifies arms spending and their own importance. Clintonistas need an excuse to distract from her being a loser. The DNC needs an excuse for manipulating the candidate selection in favor of donor interests. "Moderates" need a distraction from their ongoing refusal to address the interests of voters. ..."
Aug 12, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

Mark Thomason , August 12, 2019 at 10:34

Like the Wolfowitz explanation of the Iraq War, Russiagate is the idea around which varied interests can be organized. Cold Warriors like to hate on Russia. It justifies arms spending and their own importance. Clintonistas need an excuse to distract from her being a loser. The DNC needs an excuse for manipulating the candidate selection in favor of donor interests. "Moderates" need a distraction from their ongoing refusal to address the interests of voters.

[Aug 12, 2019] RAY McGOVERN Rich's Ghost Haunts the Courts Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... That epithet has a sordid history in the annals of U.S. intelligence. Legendary CIA Director Allen Dulles used the "brand-them-conspiracy-theorists" ploy following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy when many objected -- understandably -- to letting him pretty much run the Warren Commission, even though the CIA was suspected of having played a role in the murder. The "conspiracy theorist" tactic worked like a charm then, and now. Well, up until just now. ..."
"... U.S. Courts apply far tougher standards to evidence than do the intelligence community and the pundits who loll around lazily, feeding from the intelligence PR trough. This (hardly surprising) reality was underscored when a Dallas financial adviser named Ed Butowsky sued National Public Radio and others for defaming him about the role he played in controversial stories relating to Rich. On August 7, NPR suffered a setback, when U.S. District Court Judge Amos Mazzant affirmed a lower court decision to allow Butowsky's defamation lawsuit to proceed. ..."
"... NPR gave Isikoff 37 minutes on its popular Fresh Air program to spin his yarn about how the Seth Rich story got started. You guessed it; the Russians started it . No, we are not making this up. ..."
"... It is far from clear that Isikoff can be much help to NPR in the libel case against it. Isikoff's own writings on Russiagate are notably lacking in "verifiable statements of fact" -- information that cannot be verified. ..."
"... In any case, The Washington Post , had already debunked Isikoff's claim (which later in his article he switched to being only "purported") by pointing out that Americans had already tweeted the theory of Rich's murder days before the alleged Russian intervention. ..."
"... Butowsky's libel lawsuit can now proceed to discovery, which will include demands for documents and depositions that are likely to shed light on whatever role Rich may have played in leaking to WikiLeaks . If the government obstructs or tries to slow-roll the case, we shall have to wait and see, for example, if the court will acquiesce to the familiar government objection that information regarding Rich's murder must be withheld as a state secret? Hmmm. What would that tell us? ..."
"... During discovery in a separate court case, the government was unable to produce a final forensic report on the "hacking" of the Democratic National Committee. The DNC-hired cyber firm, CrowdStrike, failed to complete such a report, and that was apparently okay with then FBI Director James Comey, who did not require one. ..."
"... The thorny question of "persuasive sourcing," came up even more starkly on July 1, when federal Judge Dabney Friedrich ordered Robert Mueller to stop pretending he had proof that the Russian government was behind the Internet Research Agency's supposed attempt to interfere via social media in the 2016 election. Middle school-level arithmetic can prove the case that the IRA's use of social media to support Trump is ludicrous on its face. ..."
"... As journalist Patrick Lawrence put it recently: "Three years after the narrative we call Russiagate was framed and incessantly promoted, it crumbles into rubble as we speak." ..."
"... In a long interview with Lauria a few months ago in New Zealand aired this month on CN Live! , Kim Dotcom provided a wealth of detail, based on what he described as first-hand knowledge, regarding how Democratic National Committee documents were leaked to WikiLeaks in 2016. ..."
"... The major takeaway: the evidence presented by Dotcom about Seth Rich can be verified or disproven if President Trump summons the courage to order the director of NSA to dig out the relevant data, including the conversations Dotcom says he had with Rich and Rich may have had with WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange. ..."
"... Dotcom said he put Rich in touch with a middleman to transfer the DNC files to WikiLeaks . ..."
"... Mark Twain is said to have warned, "How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and [how] hard it is to undo that work again!" After three years of "Russia-Russia-Russia" in the corporate -- and even in some "progressive" -- media, this conditioning will not be easy to reverse. ..."
Aug 12, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

Simply letting the name "Seth Rich" pass your lips can condemn you to the leper colony built by the Washington Establishment for "conspiracy theorists," (the term regularly applied to someone determined to seek tangible evidence, and who is open to alternatives to "Russia-did-it.")

Rich was a young DNC employee who was murdered on a street in Washington, DC, on July 10, 2016. Many, including me, suspect that Rich played some role in the leaking of DNC emails to WikiLeaks . There is considerable circumstantial evidence that this may have been the case. Those who voice such suspicions, however, are, ipso facto , branded "conspiracy theorists."

That epithet has a sordid history in the annals of U.S. intelligence. Legendary CIA Director Allen Dulles used the "brand-them-conspiracy-theorists" ploy following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy when many objected -- understandably -- to letting him pretty much run the Warren Commission, even though the CIA was suspected of having played a role in the murder. The "conspiracy theorist" tactic worked like a charm then, and now. Well, up until just now.

Rich Hovers Above the Courts

U.S. Courts apply far tougher standards to evidence than do the intelligence community and the pundits who loll around lazily, feeding from the intelligence PR trough. This (hardly surprising) reality was underscored when a Dallas financial adviser named Ed Butowsky sued National Public Radio and others for defaming him about the role he played in controversial stories relating to Rich. On August 7, NPR suffered a setback, when U.S. District Court Judge Amos Mazzant affirmed a lower court decision to allow Butowsky's defamation lawsuit to proceed.

Judge Mazzant ruled that NPR had stated as "verifiable statements of fact" information that could not be verified , and that the plaintiff had been, in effect, accused of being engaged in wrongdoing without persuasive sourcing language.

Isikoff: Russians started it. (Wikipedia)

Imagine! -- "persuasive sourcing" required to separate fact from opinion and axes to grind! An interesting precedent to apply to the ins and outs of Russiagate. In the courts, at least, this is now beginning to happen. And NPR and others in similarly vulnerable positions are scurrying around for allies.??The day after Judge Mazzant's decision, NPR enlisted help from discredited Yahoo! News pundit Michael Isikoff (author, with David Corn, of the fiction-posing-as-fact novel Russian Roulette ). NPR gave Isikoff 37 minutes on its popular Fresh Air program to spin his yarn about how the Seth Rich story got started. You guessed it; the Russians started it . No, we are not making this up.

It is far from clear that Isikoff can be much help to NPR in the libel case against it. Isikoff's own writings on Russiagate are notably lacking in "verifiable statements of fact" -- information that cannot be verified. Watch, for example, his recent interview with Consortium News Editor Joe Lauria on CN Live!

Isikoff admitted to Lauria that he never saw the classified Russian intelligence document reportedly indicating that three days after Rich's murder the Russian SVR foreign intelligence service planted a story about Rich having been the leaker and was killed for it. This Russian intelligence "bulletin," as Isikoff called it, was supposedly placed on a bizarre website that Isikoff admitted was an unlikely place for Russia to spread disinformation. He acknowledged that he only took the word of the former prosecutor in the Rich case about the existence of this classified Russian document.

In any case, The Washington Post , had already debunked Isikoff's claim (which later in his article he switched to being only "purported") by pointing out that Americans had already tweeted the theory of Rich's murder days before the alleged Russian intervention.

' Persuasive Sourcing' & Discovery ??

Butowsky's libel lawsuit can now proceed to discovery, which will include demands for documents and depositions that are likely to shed light on whatever role Rich may have played in leaking to WikiLeaks . If the government obstructs or tries to slow-roll the case, we shall have to wait and see, for example, if the court will acquiesce to the familiar government objection that information regarding Rich's murder must be withheld as a state secret? Hmmm. What would that tell us?

Butowsky: Suit could reveal critical information. (Flickr)

During discovery in a separate court case, the government was unable to produce a final forensic report on the "hacking" of the Democratic National Committee. The DNC-hired cyber firm, CrowdStrike, failed to complete such a report, and that was apparently okay with then FBI Director James Comey, who did not require one.

The incomplete, redacted, draft, second-hand "forensics" that Comey settled for from CrowdStrike does not qualify as credible evidence -- much less "persuasive sourcing" to support the claim that the Russians "hacked" into the DNC. Moreover, CrowdStrike has a dubious reputation for professionalism and a well known anti-Russia bias.

The thorny question of "persuasive sourcing," came up even more starkly on July 1, when federal Judge Dabney Friedrich ordered Robert Mueller to stop pretending he had proof that the Russian government was behind the Internet Research Agency's supposed attempt to interfere via social media in the 2016 election. Middle school-level arithmetic can prove the case that the IRA's use of social media to support Trump is ludicrous on its face.

Russia-gate Rubble

As journalist Patrick Lawrence put it recently: "Three years after the narrative we call Russiagate was framed and incessantly promoted, it crumbles into rubble as we speak." Falling syllogism! Step nimbly to one side.

The "conspiracy theorist" epithet is not likely to much longer block attention to the role, if any, played by Rich -- the more so since some players who say they were directly involved with Rich are coming forward.

In a long interview with Lauria a few months ago in New Zealand aired this month on CN Live! , Kim Dotcom provided a wealth of detail, based on what he described as first-hand knowledge, regarding how Democratic National Committee documents were leaked to WikiLeaks in 2016.

The major takeaway: the evidence presented by Dotcom about Seth Rich can be verified or disproven if President Trump summons the courage to order the director of NSA to dig out the relevant data, including the conversations Dotcom says he had with Rich and Rich may have had with WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange.

Dotcom said he put Rich in touch with a middleman to transfer the DNC files to WikiLeaks . Sadly, Trump has flinched more than once rather than confront the Deep State -- and this time there are a bunch of very well connected, senior Deep State practitioners who could face prosecution .

Another sign that Rich's story is likely to draw new focus is the virulent character assassination indulged in by former investigative journalist James Risen.

Not Risen to the Challenge

Risen: Called Binney a "conspiracy theorist." (Flickr)

On August 5, in an interview on The Hill's "Rising," Risen chose to call former NSA Technical Director Bill Binney -- you guessed it -- a "conspiracy theorist" on Russia-gate, with no demurral, much less pushback, from the hosts.

The having-done-good-work-in-the-past-and-now-not-so-much Risen can be considered a paradigm for what has happened to so many Kool-Aid drinking journalists. Jim's transition from investigative journalist to stenographer is, nonetheless unsettling. Contributing causes? It appears that the traditional sources within the intelligence agencies, whom Risen was able to cultivate discreetly in the past, are too fearful now to even talk to him, lest they get caught by one or two of the myriad surveillance systems in play.

Those at the top of the relevant agencies, however, are only too happy to provide grist. Journalists have to make a living, after all. Topic A, of course, is Russian "interference" in the 2016 election. And, of course, "There can be little doubt" the Russians did it.

"Big Jim" Risen, as he is known, jumped on the bandwagon as soon as he joined The Intercept , with a fulsome article on February 17, 2018 titled " Is Donald Trump a Traitor? " Here's an excerpt:

"The evidence that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win is already compelling, and it grows stronger by the day.

"There can be little doubt now that Russian intelligence officials were behind an effort to hack the DNC's computers and steal emails and other information from aides to Hillary Clinton as a means of damaging her presidential campaign. Russian intelligence also used fake social media accounts and other tools to create a global echo chamber both for stories about the emails and for anti-Clinton lies dressed up to look like news.

"To their disgrace, editors and reporters at American news organizations greatly enhanced the Russian echo chamber, eagerly writing stories about Clinton and the Democratic Party based on the emails, while showing almost no interest during the presidential campaign in exactly how those emails came to be disclosed and distributed." (sic)

Poor Jim. He shows himself just as susceptible as virtually all of his fellow corporate journalists to the epidemic-scale HWHW virus (Hillary Would Have Won) that set in during Nov. 2016 and for which the truth seems to be no cure. From his perch at The Intercept , Risen will continue to try to shape the issues. Russiagaters major ally, of course, is the corporate media which has most Americans pretty much under their thumb.

Incidentally, neither The New York Times, The Washington Post , nor The Wall Street Journal has printed or posted a word about Judge Mazzant's ruling on the Butowsky suit.

Mark Twain is said to have warned, "How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and [how] hard it is to undo that work again!" After three years of "Russia-Russia-Russia" in the corporate -- and even in some "progressive" -- media, this conditioning will not be easy to reverse.

Here's how one astute observer with a sense of humor described the situation last week, in a comment under one of my recent pieces on Consortium News:

" One can write the most thought-out and well documented academic-like essays, articles and reports and the true believers in Russiagate will dismiss it all with a mere flick of their wrist. The mockery and scorn directed towards those of us who knew the score from day one won't relent. They could die and go to heaven and ask god what really happened during the 2016 election. God would reply to them in no uncertain terms that Putin and the Russians had absolutely nothing to do with anything in '16, and they'd all throw up their hands and say, 'aha! So, God's in on this too!' It's the great lie that won't die."

I'm not so sure. It is likely to be a while though before this is over.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. Ray was a CIA analyst for 27 years; in retirement he co-founded Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

[Aug 12, 2019] Clinton and to rush to Brexit? Why, the evil Russians, of course, are behind it all by Craig Murray

Russophrenia is rampant in the USA those days...
From comments: "I’ll say it again. Why aren’t progressive Dimocraps clamoring to have Hillary water-boarded so the truth can be heard?."
Aug 12, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

Douglas Adams famously suggested that the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42. In the world of the political elite, the answer is Russiagate. What has caused the electorate to turn on the political elite, to defeat Hillary

[Aug 08, 2019] The Mainstream Media Wants The Mifsud Story To Just Go Away

Notable quotes:
"... "I can report absolutely that the Durham investigators have now obtained an audiotape deposition of Joseph Mifsud, where he describes his work, why he targeted George Papadopoulos , who directed him to do that, what directions he was given, and why he set that entire process of introducing Papadopoulos to Russia in motion in March of 2016, which is really the flashpoint the starting point of this whole Russia collusion narrative," Solomon told Fox News' Sean Hannity. ..."
"... You can't save the Russian collusion narrative, if you can't find any real Russians anywhere in the story. The FBI under James Comey will then be seen as having engaged in an operation to entrap people, and "Russian agents" turn out to be fakes working for the FBI and who were making fake offers of Russian help to the Trump campaign. ..."
"... Mifsud turning out to be a fake Russian agent working for the FBI ..."
"... To have to admit that the story was actually right, while they themselves were still peddling the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, would be a most bitter pill for many of these 'legitimate' news outlets to swallow. ..."
"... And yet when it comes to recent developments about Mifsud, a key player in this Trump-Russia collusion narrative, many mainstream reporters appear indifferent at best, or outrightly hostile at worst to these latest developments. ..."
"... While many of these mainstream media reporters have been desperately trying to find some way to save the Trump/Russian collusion narrative, the last thing they want to have to report is that the supposed key Russian agent that started this whole Spygate thing wasn't really a Russian agent, but was instead an FBI asset pretending to be a Russian agent. ..."
Aug 07, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

The Mainstream Media Wants The Mifsud Story To Just Go Away

by Tyler Durden Wed, 08/07/2019 - 22:35 0 SHARES

Authored by Brian Cates via The Epoch Times,

While many mainstream media journalists have been spinning fantasies for more than two years, based on Russian collusion stories being handed to them by anonymous sources, crack reporter John Solomon of The Hill has been pursuing real leads and uncovering actual evidence.

Now, Solomon is reporting that an audiotape containing professor Joseph Mifsud's deposition has been given to both U.S. Attorney John Durham's investigators and to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"I can report absolutely that the Durham investigators have now obtained an audiotape deposition of Joseph Mifsud, where he describes his work, why he targeted George Papadopoulos , who directed him to do that, what directions he was given, and why he set that entire process of introducing Papadopoulos to Russia in motion in March of 2016, which is really the flashpoint the starting point of this whole Russia collusion narrative," Solomon told Fox News' Sean Hannity.

"I can also confirm that the Senate Judiciary Committee has also obtained the same deposition," he said.

Mifsud , who I have written about extensively in previous columns , is the key that turns the lock to the lid of this Pandora's box that we refer to as "Spygate."

So I'm wondering why Solomon appears to be the only mainstream reporter pursuing this Mifsud story.

I suspect it's because many DNC Media outlets, after having fallen deeply and passionately in love with the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, are reluctant to call attention to something that would be the final nail in its coffin.

The last thing the mainstream media wants right now would be for Mifsud to go on the record with both Durham's investigative team and with Congress to say he was working for the FBI and was only pretending to be a Russian agent.

If Mifsud was an FBI asset sent to entrap Papadopoulos, then there are no real Russian agents anywhere in this entire Trump-Russia collusion story.

Foreign policy advisor to US President Donald Trump's election campaign, George Papadopoulos goes through security at the US District Court for his sentencing in Washington, DC on Sept. 7, 2018. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images)

Ponder what that means for a minute.

You can't save the Russian collusion narrative, if you can't find any real Russians anywhere in the story. The FBI under James Comey will then be seen as having engaged in an operation to entrap people, and "Russian agents" turn out to be fakes working for the FBI and who were making fake offers of Russian help to the Trump campaign.

Some of these news media outlets are still - at this late date - claiming there's some life left in the Russian collusion narrative. Mifsud is literally the last dying hope for these people that somewhere in all of this there is a real Russian asset and real collusion. They literally need Mifsud to be a real asset of the Putin government. And if Mifsud goes on the record to officially affirm he was working for the FBI, then the media's last dying hope is gone forever.

To hear the mainstream media tell it, Mifsud turning out to be a fake Russian agent working for the FBI is a "conspiracy theory" created by "right-wing zealots" such as Reps. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

To have to admit that the story was actually right, while they themselves were still peddling the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, would be a most bitter pill for many of these 'legitimate' news outlets to swallow.

Which likely explains why Solomon appears to be just about the only mainstream reporter pursuing the Mifsud story. If there are any other major news outlet reporters out there avidly pursuing the facts about Mifsud and his reported contacts and testimony to Justice Department investigators, they're being pretty quiet about it.

What are the mainstream news reporters who are ignoring the Mifsud story telling themselves, anyway?

"I can't pursue this new information on Mifsud, because it's taking the story where I don't want it to go!"?

That's a thought process that happens only to a political activist disguised as a reporter. No real reporter would ever think that way.

And yet when it comes to recent developments about Mifsud, a key player in this Trump-Russia collusion narrative, many mainstream reporters appear indifferent at best, or outrightly hostile at worst to these latest developments.

While many of these mainstream media reporters have been desperately trying to find some way to save the Trump/Russian collusion narrative, the last thing they want to have to report is that the supposed key Russian agent that started this whole Spygate thing wasn't really a Russian agent, but was instead an FBI asset pretending to be a Russian agent.

These selfsame media reporters have spent more than two years mocking the idea that Mifsud is an FBI asset as something straight out of the right-wing fever swamp of convoluted nonsense conspiracy theories. This is why so many political activists masquerading as journalists are desperately hoping that somehow the Mifsud story will just go away and die on its own.

My instinct says they're going to be massively disappointed soon.


leodogma1 , 17 minutes ago link

The only one's ever colluding with the Russians was Hillary the "******* Rotten" Clinton, Obongo "the One" and the usual suspects (Comey,Clapper,Brennan,Lynch,) et.al .. FBI/DOJ/CIA Rats, British UN-intelligence,Australian & Ukraine interference. The DNC server was never hacked by Russians but copied, the Steele/Fusion GPS dossier was a work of worn out fiction that was originally put together in 2007 and used against McCain.

Nelbev , 28 minutes ago link

Worth a read,

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/05/05/nunes_mueller_report_cherry-picked_information_to_portray_mifsud_as_russian_agent_he_was_really_a_western_agent.html# !

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/05/05/maria-bartiromo-and-devin-nunes-discuss-predicate-of-spygate-and-mueller-dossier/

Russian agent Mifsud working with Papadopoulos to get Hillary emails claimed by DNC/Crowdstrike/Perkins Coie hacked by Russians before destroyed by Hillary under subpoena, just a FBI paid actor to keep the narrative going and covering up illegal spying on Trump, NSA 702 "about" querries by private contractors ang gov. violating FISA which happened much earlier.

greenskeeper carl , 28 seconds ago link

Conservative treehouse does a better job than just about anywhere else I've seen of tying that all together. But, if they are correct about this, as they've been correct about a lot of things, it won't change anything or matter at all. None of these people will ever be indicted, much less spend a single day in jail. Sad, but true. In a year and a half trump will most likely be gone, and all of this will be memory holed.

TrustbutVerify , 55 minutes ago link

Most Democrats still adhere to the Trump - Russia collusion narrative. And they wonder why some Leftists like Roseanne Barr admit 'Democrats have gone insane.' An opinion shared by most of the rest of the country. And yet public speeches by Trump are enthusiastically attended by thousands - a story very much minimized by these same "news" outlets.

Those Democrats exist within a media bubble (95% of press outlets - online, too) working for the Deep State (99% are Democrats) that misinforms them. Perhaps they are intentionally self-duped. Though it remains shocking how deeply deluded they are.

Justapleb , 30 minutes ago link

They adhere to the hoax because they knew it was a hoax to begin with.

The dems have never been sincere calling people racist, sexist, Hitler, then Russian or Assad stooges, etc.

Their Saul Alinsky tactic is to shriek incessantly, always accuse, never take the defensive because your position is indefensible. You can't argue why offering open borders and free health care to 7 billion people is rational.

That is why the violence is so important to them, and so important to keep concealing the deep state/democratic crime syndicate.

Charlie_Martel , 59 minutes ago link

The main stream media is the mouth piece of the intelligence community.

Walking Turtle , 54 minutes ago link

The main stream media is the mouth piece of the intelligence community.

The main stream media is [ currently ] the mouth piece of the [ criminal Deep State ] intelligence community.

There; fify. The "Intelligence Community" in its entirety is hardly any monolith of pure evil. There are cadres and factions within every agency, including Old-School Patriot.

MUST be said now and then lest others lose perspective. And that is all. 0{:-\o[

Oldwood , 1 hour ago link

None of it matters.

The progressives will happily embrace the worst criminal behavior by our government as JUSTIFIED to depose the devil incarnate Trump.

There is only one principle...winning. The law is THEIR weapon devised to punish their enemies and control their minions. All means are justifiable to the ends, and the vast majority of those "serving" in government have no hesitancy in abusing their power to fulfill the larger agenda.

They will have proof and undeniable facts...to no avail because those charged with the prosecution of their own, will NOT.

DEDA CVETKO , 1 hour ago link

I have spoken with my crystal ball, and it told me something rather unintelligible about Mifsud, MI-6, Seth Rich and Vince Foster.

Does anyone have any idea what my crystal ball was talking about?

Demologos , 34 minutes ago link

When I asked my magic 8-ball if Mifsud was See Aye Ehh, it answered "very likely"

DEDA CVETKO , 20 minutes ago link

Smart balls you got there!

fezline , 1 hour ago link

More sensationalism... how many articles are you going to post saying the spygate situation is about to blow up? I would love for it to happen but unlike the libtards hanging on Rachel Maddow's every word... when I hear the walls are closing in for over 2 or 3 months straight... I start to call ********... Give up the sensationalism Tyler... it's straight up MSM flavor ********.

[Aug 05, 2019] UK 'up to its neck' in Russiagate affair, says George Galloway, as secret texts reveal British role

Barr now has goods to jail major conspirators for life. It is unlikely happened but we can hope.
Notable quotes:
"... "Turns out it was Britain that was the foreign country interfering in American affairs," former MP George Galloway told RT, speaking about the new revelations published by the Guardian about early British involvement in the 'Russiagate' investigation. ..."
"... The Guardian reported on texts between former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe and Jeremy Fleming, his then counterpart at MI5, who now heads GCHQ. The two men met in 2016 to discuss "our strange situation" – an apparent reference to Russia's alleged interference in US domestic politics. ..."
"... British intelligence "appears to have played a key role in the early stages," the report said. ..."
"... Galloway said the revelation was not surprising because people "already knew" that British intelligence had played a part in the Russia-related investigations in the US. He recalled that it was former British spy Christopher Steele who drew up the now-infamous Steele dossier, which made multiple unverifiable and salacious claims about Trump and has since been largely discredited. Britain is "up to its neck in the whole Russiagate affair," he said. ..."
"... Asked what the UK stood to gain by trying to implicate Russia in a US election scandal at a time when then-foreign secretary Boris Johnson was dismissing baseless claims of Russian interference in the Brexit campaign, Galloway noted that Johnson's comments on Russia have appeared to strangely sway between friendly and antagonistic. ..."
"... In June 2016, the FBI opened a covert investigation codenamed 'Crossfire Hurricane' into Trump's now disproven collusion with Moscow, which was later taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller. ..."
Jul 31, 2019 | www.rt.com

While hysteria raged about possible Russian "interference" in the 2016 US election, British intelligence officials were secretly playing a "key role" in helping instigate investigations into Donald Trump, secret texts have shown. "Turns out it was Britain that was the foreign country interfering in American affairs," former MP George Galloway told RT, speaking about the new revelations published by the Guardian about early British involvement in the 'Russiagate' investigation.

The Guardian reported on texts between former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe and Jeremy Fleming, his then counterpart at MI5, who now heads GCHQ. The two men met in 2016 to discuss "our strange situation" – an apparent reference to Russia's alleged interference in US domestic politics.

British intelligence "appears to have played a key role in the early stages," the report said.

www.youtube.com/embed/y0X5ubiSd0M

Galloway said the revelation was not surprising because people "already knew" that British intelligence had played a part in the Russia-related investigations in the US. He recalled that it was former British spy Christopher Steele who drew up the now-infamous Steele dossier, which made multiple unverifiable and salacious claims about Trump and has since been largely discredited. Britain is "up to its neck in the whole Russiagate affair," he said.

The texts also reveal that the Brexit vote was viewed by some in the FBI as something that had been influenced by Russia.

Asked what the UK stood to gain by trying to implicate Russia in a US election scandal at a time when then-foreign secretary Boris Johnson was dismissing baseless claims of Russian interference in the Brexit campaign, Galloway noted that Johnson's comments on Russia have appeared to strangely sway between friendly and antagonistic.

Johnson is like "a sofa that bears the impression of the last person to sit upon him," the former MP quipped. What happens next will depend on who is leading the tango, "the orange man in Washington or the blonde mop-head in London."

In June 2016, the FBI opened a covert investigation codenamed 'Crossfire Hurricane' into Trump's now disproven collusion with Moscow, which was later taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller.

Ultimately, the two-year-long probe that followed came up short, producing no evidence to prove a conspiracy or collusion between Trump campaign officials and Russia

See also:

Also on rt.com Fear behind fury: As DNI, Ratcliffe could expose FISA files that Russiagaters hope stay buried

[Aug 05, 2019] In The World Of 'Fact', Russiagate Is Dead. In The World Of Politics, It's Still The New '42'

Notable quotes:
"... "The Russians did it" is the article of faith for the political elite who cannot understand why the electorate rejected the triangulated "consensus" the elite constructed and sold to us , where the filthy rich get ever richer and the rest of us have falling incomes, low employment rights and scanty welfare benefits. You don't like that system? You have been hypnotised and misled by evil Russian trolls and hackers. ..."
"... Except virtually none of this is true. Mueller's inability to defend in person his deeply flawed report took a certain amount of steam out of the blame Russia campaign. But what should have killed off "Russiagate" forever is the judgement of Judge John G Koetl of the Federal District Court of New York. ..."
"... Judge Koetl's subsequent dismissal of the Russiagate nonsense is a problem for the mainstream media and their favourite narrative. They have largely chosen to pretend it never happened, but when obliged to mention it have attempted to misrepresent this as the judge confirming that the Russians hacked the DNC. It very definitely and specifically is not that; the judge was obliged to rule on the procedural motion to dismiss on the basis of assuming the allegation to be true. Legal distinctions, even very plain ones like this, are perhaps difficult for the average cut and paste mainstream media stenographer to understand. But the widespread failure to report the meaning of Koetl's judgement fairly is inexcusable. ..."
"... Judge Koetl goes further and asserts that Wikileaks, as a news organisation, had every right to obtain and publish the emails in exercise of a fundamental First Amendment right. The judge also specifically notes that no evidence has been put forward by the DNC that shows any relationship between Russia and Wikileaks. Wikileaks, accepting the DNC's version of events, merely contacted the website that first leaked some of the emails, in order to ask to publish them. ..."
"... Judge Koetl also notes firmly that while various contacts are alleged by the DNC between individuals from Trump's campaign and individuals allegedly linked to the Russian government, no evidence at all has been put forward to show that the content of any of those meetings had anything to do with either Wikileaks or the DNC's emails. ..."
"... So there we have it. Russiagate as a theory is as completely exploded as the appalling Guardian front page lie published by Kath Viner and Luke Harding fabricating the "secret meetings" between Paul Manafort and Julian Assange in the Ecuadorean Embassy. But the political class and the mainstream media, both in the service of billionaires, have moved on to a stage where truth is irrelevant, and I do not doubt that Russiagate stories will thus persist. They are so useful for the finances of the armaments and security industries, and in keeping the population in fear and jingoist politicians in power. ..."
"... the worse the better. The Russians lost their last illusions that having the Americans as supposedly friends, the Russians lived the worst, for example, if we take the time of the rule of Boris Yeltsin, who called Bill Clinton a friend. And Clinton called him Boris. ..."
"... It was the British government that tried to rig the American presidential election and then overthrow the duly-elected American president. ..."
Aug 05, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Craig Murray,

Douglas Adams famously suggested that the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42.

In the world of the political elite, the answer is Russiagate.

What has caused the electorate to turn on the political elite, to defeat Hillary and to rush to Brexit? Why, the evil Russians, of course, are behind it all.

It was the Russians who hacked the DNC and published Hillary's emails, thus causing her to lose the election because the Russians, dammit, who cares what was in the emails? It was the Russians.

It is the Russians who are behind Wikileaks,and Julian Assange is a Putin agent (as is that evil Craig Murray).

It was the Russians who swayed the 1,300,000,000 dollar Presidential election campaign result with 100,000 dollars worth of Facebook advertising.

It was the evil Russians who once did a dodgy trade deal with Aaron Banks then did something improbable with Cambridge Analytica that hypnotised people en masse via Facebook into supporting Brexit.

All of this is known to be true by every Blairite, every Clintonite, by the BBC, by CNN, by the Guardian, the New York Times and the Washington Post. "The Russians did it" is the article of faith for the political elite who cannot understand why the electorate rejected the triangulated "consensus" the elite constructed and sold to us , where the filthy rich get ever richer and the rest of us have falling incomes, low employment rights and scanty welfare benefits. You don't like that system? You have been hypnotised and misled by evil Russian trolls and hackers.

Except virtually none of this is true. Mueller's inability to defend in person his deeply flawed report took a certain amount of steam out of the blame Russia campaign. But what should have killed off "Russiagate" forever is the judgement of Judge John G Koetl of the Federal District Court of New York.

In a lawsuit brought by the Democratic National Committee against Russia and against Wikileaks, and against inter alia Donald Trump Jr, Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort and Julian Assange, for the first time the claims of collusion between Trump and Russia were subjected to actual scrutiny in a court of law. And Judge Koetl concluded that, quite simply, the claims made as the basis of Russiagate are insufficient to even warrant a hearing.

The judgement is 81 pages long, but if you want to understand the truth about the entire "Russiagate" spin it is well worth reading it in full. Otherwise let me walk you through it.

This is the crucial point about Koetl's judgement. In considering dismissing a case at the outset in response to a motion to dismiss from the defence, the judge is obliged to give the plaintiff every benefit and to take the alleged facts described by the DNC as true. The stage of challenging and testing those facts has not been reached. The question Koetl is answering is this. Accepting for the moment the DNC's facts as true, on the face of it, even if everything that the Democratic National Committee alleged happened, did indeed happen, is there the basis for a case? And his answer is a comprehensive no. Even the facts alleged to comprise the Russiagate narrative do not mount up to a plausible case.

The consequence of this procedure is of course that in this judgement Koetl is accepting the DNC's "facts". The judgement is therefore written entirely on the assumption that the Russians did hack the DNC computers as alleged by the plaintiff (the Democratic National Committee), and that meetings and correspondence took place as the DNC alleged and their content was also what the DNC alleged. It is vital to understand in reading the document that Koetl is not stating that he finds these "facts" to be true. Doubtless had the trial proceeded many of them would have been challenged by the defendants and their evidentiary basis tested in court. It is simply at this stage the only question Koetl is answering is whether, assuming the facts alleged all to be true, there are grounds for trial.

Judge Koetl's subsequent dismissal of the Russiagate nonsense is a problem for the mainstream media and their favourite narrative. They have largely chosen to pretend it never happened, but when obliged to mention it have attempted to misrepresent this as the judge confirming that the Russians hacked the DNC. It very definitely and specifically is not that; the judge was obliged to rule on the procedural motion to dismiss on the basis of assuming the allegation to be true. Legal distinctions, even very plain ones like this, are perhaps difficult for the average cut and paste mainstream media stenographer to understand. But the widespread failure to report the meaning of Koetl's judgement fairly is inexcusable.

The key finding is this. Even accepting the DNC's evidence at face value, the judge ruled that it provides no evidence of collusion between Russia, Wikileaks or any of the named parties to hack the DNC's computers. It is best expressed here in this dismissal of the charge that a property violation was committed, but in fact the same ruling by the judge that no evidence has been presented of any collusion for an illegal purpose, runs through the dismissal of each and every one of the varied charges put forward by the DNC as grounds for their suit.

Judge Koetl goes further and asserts that Wikileaks, as a news organisation, had every right to obtain and publish the emails in exercise of a fundamental First Amendment right. The judge also specifically notes that no evidence has been put forward by the DNC that shows any relationship between Russia and Wikileaks. Wikileaks, accepting the DNC's version of events, merely contacted the website that first leaked some of the emails, in order to ask to publish them.

Judge Koetl also notes firmly that while various contacts are alleged by the DNC between individuals from Trump's campaign and individuals allegedly linked to the Russian government, no evidence at all has been put forward to show that the content of any of those meetings had anything to do with either Wikileaks or the DNC's emails.

In short, Koetl dismissed the case entirely because simply no evidence has been produced of the existence of any collusion between Wikileaks, the Trump campaign and Russia. That does not mean that the evidence has been seen and is judged unconvincing. In a situation where the judge is duty bound to give credence to the plaintiff's evidence and not judge its probability, there simply was no evidence of collusion to which he could give credence. The entire Russia-Wikileaks-Trump fabrication is a total nonsense. But I don't suppose that fact will kill it off.

The major implication for the Assange extradition case of the Koetl judgement is his robust and unequivocal statement of the obvious truth that Wikileaks is a news organisation and its right to publish documents, specifically including stolen documents, is protected by the First Amendment when those documents touch on the public interest.

... ... ...

And in conclusion, I should state emphatically that while Judge Koetl was obliged to accept for the time being the allegation that the Russians had hacked the DNC as alleged, in fact this never happened. The emails came from a leak not a hack. The Mueller Inquiry's refusal to take evidence from the actual publisher of the leaks, Julian Assange, in itself discredits his report. Mueller should also have taken crucial evidence from Bill Binney, former Technical Director of the NSA, who has explained in detail why an outside hack was technically impossible based on the forensic evidence provided.

The other key point that proves Mueller's Inquiry was never a serious search for truth is that at no stage was any independent forensic independence taken from the DNC's servers, instead the word of the DNC's own security consultants was simply accepted as true. Finally no progress has been made – or is intended to be made – on the question of who killed Seth Rich, while the pretend police investigation has "lost" his laptop.

Though why anybody would believe Robert Mueller about anything is completely beyond me.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/mK5T_rZmVyg

So there we have it. Russiagate as a theory is as completely exploded as the appalling Guardian front page lie published by Kath Viner and Luke Harding fabricating the "secret meetings" between Paul Manafort and Julian Assange in the Ecuadorean Embassy. But the political class and the mainstream media, both in the service of billionaires, have moved on to a stage where truth is irrelevant, and I do not doubt that Russiagate stories will thus persist. They are so useful for the finances of the armaments and security industries, and in keeping the population in fear and jingoist politicians in power.

* * *

Unlike his adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, Craig's blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate. Subscriptions to keep Craig's blog going are gratefully received .


Let it Go , 48 minutes ago link

One of the things we often forget is that many Americans don't really know very much about Russia or the Russian people and most of what they have been told has been filtered through a national security apparatus so entrenched in a cold war mindset they appear paranoid. It is clear the warmongering faction residing within Washington has declared Russia a major threat and sparked massive media coverage to convince us it is true.

The myth of Russia's strength has been amplified by journalists seeking to routinely curry favor with government sources and others by falsely hyping the official point of view . The fact is Russia's economy is rather small and while over the years they produce and export a lot of weapons their military is not well funded. More on Russia today in the article below.

http://Russia Today, The Country-Not The Television Network html

Generation O , 6 hours ago link

You are not supposed to know anything. Do not disappoint the army of whores, sycophants, trolls, thugs, and megalomaniacs depending upon you in this regard.

PKKA , 10 hours ago link

Translation into English. I am the most evil Russian Troll. Your Trump, this orange idiot, has imposed so many sanctions against Russia that even the calmest Russian Troll begins to think that Hilary would be a better option compared to him. Although the worse the better. The Russians lost their last illusions that having the Americans as supposedly friends, the Russians lived the worst, for example, if we take the time of the rule of Boris Yeltsin, who called Bill Clinton a friend. And Clinton called him Boris. And the most beautiful times, this is the time of the Cold War. Long live the confrontation!

chunga , 10 hours ago link

The red team lost the house and is poised to lose more because they inexplicably ignored everything in OANN's (banned) report.

Who Killed Seth Rich?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/1quLcteLGfw9/

They've been doing this for over thirty years. If we don't replace them soon you can forget political solutions to anything. Their track record is what it is. They suck.

Archeofuturist , 9 hours ago link

Republicans are feckless impotent eunuchs who are only concerned about when the next check from the donor class will arrive or what their masters at AIPAC have to say. At least the Dems have the stones to stab you in the front. If Trumps first two years didn't wake up the GOP masses, nothing will.

"American Conservatism is finished, and its remaining adherents are, whether they know it or not, merely ghosts wandering, mazed, in the daylight." -- Revilo P Oliver

WTFUD , 10 hours ago link

The longer this charade of Russia blame game continues the sooner the US collapses. Keep it up suckers!

VWAndy , 10 hours ago link

Well if Russia Russia Russia dnt work. An Racist with feelings dont work. Whats left? Flopping around on the floor like a fish?

hoytmonger , 11 hours ago link

Politicians and pundits of both teams continually repeat things that are provably false.

Then the falsehoods will be printed in history books and taught to children in the government's compulsory indoctrination facilities.

Then the falsehoods become historical "facts."

Herodotus , 11 hours ago link

It was the British government that tried to rig the American presidential election and then overthrow the duly-elected American president.

[Aug 03, 2019] Parteigenosse Mueller is a corrupt tool of the neoliberal/neocon establishment and proved to be senile apparatchik who was not in control of his own investigation

Aug 03, 2019 | economistsview.typepad.com

EMichael

, July 24, 2019 at 09:19 AM
Lieu: "The reason again that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of OLC opinion stating you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?"

Mueller: "That is correct."

This has gone way beyond long enough. It is past time to impeach trump, and anyone who disagrees should be pushed out of control and then their office.

likbez -> EMichael...

, August 01, 2019 at 08:28 AM

Please stop promoting Russiagate hoax/witch hunt. Parteigenosse Mueller is a corrupt tool of the neoliberal/neocon establishment and proved to be senile apparatchik who was not in control of his own investigation.

His words mean nothing but his embarrassment that he was not able to accomplish assigned to him hit job. He actually belongs to the jail himself for his role in Iraq war.

I think everybody who facilitated Iraq war should be jailed first. Preferably before Trump is jailed...

Actually the whole neoliberal elite is corrupt, so this does not solve the problems facing the USA and fist of all the collapse of neoliberalism, but justice should be served.

Biden was one of the architects and as such he should be allowed to hold any elected position in the USA or elsewhere. Pushing this semi-senile neoliberal and war criminal as a candidate is the best way neoliberal Dems can commit a suicide.

Christopher H. said in reply to kurt... , July 25, 2019 at 09:47 AM
Mueller said they didn't have enough evidence - AFTER ALL THAT - to charge for collusion/conspiracy.

Republicans like Mueller aren't going to save us. (look at Puerto Rico for what's going to happen)

Mueller said they didn't exonerate Trump for obstruction. Maybe a President Sanders or Warren will have Trump arrested after he leaves office.

Biden and the rest will "look to the future" as Obama did with the Bush criminals and Wall Street.

JohnH -> kurt... , July 25, 2019 at 12:59 PM
kurt is playing games with words again collusion is not a legally defined term. Criminal conspiracy is. And Mueller did not find enough evidence to support criminal conspiracy by Trump or by his entourage.

Can kurt please dispense with his constant regurgitating BS? I doubt it. Spewing nonsense only helps convince Trump supporters that they are right.

Maybe once kurt gets mad enough with Pelosi for not impeaching, maybe he'll finally wake up and have an epiphany that the Democratic leadership is a big part of the problem on a whole range of issues.

ilsm -> kurt... , July 25, 2019 at 05:47 PM
there was no justice to obstruct in Obama's attempted subversion of the 2016 election.

Mueller (very hard to watch, sad) never went in to how crooked the evidence his partisan deducers used used is!

Mueller had no answer on the DNC acquired "dossier", done by UK citizens.

How do you run a prosecution and not know where the evidence came form?

Obama ran a coup attempt.

kurt -> ilsm... , July 26, 2019 at 10:23 AM
The argument here is that the Dems helped the Russians elect Donald Trump so they could have a coup. This makes sense........
ilsm -> kurt... , July 30, 2019 at 03:44 PM
First deplorables were traitors now they are racists! Wow!

Do you think a God fearing, late middle aged, life memeber of the Klan would go for anything Russian?

You alls call the soon to be prove coup attempt a conspiracy theory!

kurt -> ilsm... , July 31, 2019 at 04:54 PM
I wonder where you got that I thought deplorables are traitors. I think they are fake patriots since they think only some of us citizens are full citizens, but traitors?
ilsm -> kurt... , July 25, 2019 at 06:34 PM
I worry for you if you found Mueller persuasive.

Who said the "truth shall set you free"?

It was no democrat.

Paine -> EMichael... , July 24, 2019 at 02:54 PM
My my

House Dems
Impeach trump

How will investigating lead to conviction with the senate as it is ?

Are you expecting significant increases in public support for impeachment

Will follow from more investigation in particular under the mission banner of impeachment inquiry

So much that a senate acquittal will destroy the GOP
As well as topple trump

kurt -> Paine ... , July 24, 2019 at 04:42 PM
I think that publicly laying out the perfidy and criminality in a way that HAS to penetrate the Fox bubble will help the fever break.
ilsm -> kurt... , July 25, 2019 at 05:50 PM
the few hundred thousand conned by CNN are not "broad support".
Christopher H. said in reply to kurt... , July 25, 2019 at 07:06 PM
naive kurt will be waiting a long time for the fever to break, but then he doesn't really care
EMichael -> Paine ... , July 25, 2019 at 04:37 AM
Of course there would be no conviction in the Senate, that is not the point.

The point is that people will become familiar with the actual crimes this president has committed. And that will create the main reason to vote Dem in 2020.

This will not hurt the GOP with their voters. Nothing can do that. The whole goal is to get Dem voters to the polls.

Paine -> EMichael... , July 25, 2019 at 06:22 AM
Investigation by the house can accomplish this
Without the threat of short circuiting the ballot box system

Once trump has lost the support of half his 45 percent
It will be election time anyway

La nan has the correct plan

[Jul 31, 2019] Secret McCabe Texts With MI-5 Counterpart Emerge, Spotlighting UK s Early Role In Russiagate

Notable quotes:
"... In 2017, The Guardian reported that Britain's spy agencies had played a key role in alerting their American counterparts of communications between members of the Trump campaign and "suspected Russian agents," which was passed along to the US in what was characterized as a "routine exchange of information." ..."
"... "For over a year, people have asked me to declassify. What I've done is declassified everything," said Trump, adding "He can look and I hope he looks at the UK and I hope he looks at Australia and I hope he looks at Ukraine ." ..."
"... "It's the greatest hoax probably in the history of our country and somebody has to get to the bottom of it. We'll see. For a long period of time, they wanted me to declassify and I did." ..."
"... in May, Fox News reported that the discredited "Steele Dossier" - assembled by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele - was referred to as "crown material" in an email exchange suggesting that former FBI Director James Comey insisted that CIA Director John Brennan pushed for the inclusion of the dossier in the intelligence community assessment (ICA) on Russian interference. ..."
"... Moreover, much of "Operation Crossfire Hurricane" - the FBI's official investigation into the Trump campaign - occurred on UK soil , which is perhaps why the New York Times reported last September that the UK begged Trump not to declassify 'Russiagate' documents 'without redaction.' ..."
"... Maltese professor and self-described Clinton foundation member Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer. ..."
Jul 31, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Newly surfaced text messages between Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and his counterpart at MI-5, the UK's domestic security service, have cast new light on Britain's role in the FBI's 2016 'Russiagate' investigation, according to The Guardian .

Two of the most senior intelligence officials in the US and UK privately shared concerns about " our strange situation " as the FBI launched its 2016 investigation into whether Donald Trump's campaign was colluding with Russia , the Guardian has learned.

Text messages between Andrew McCabe, the deputy director of the FBI at the time, and Jeremy Fleming , his then counterpart at MI5, now the head of GCHQ , also reveal their mutual surprise at the result of the EU referendum, which some US officials regarded as a "wake-up call", according to a person familiar with the matter. - The Guardian

McCabe and Flemming's texts were "infrequent and cryptic," but "occurred with some regularity" after the June 2016 Brexit referendum.

In his text message about the August 2016 meeting, Fleming appeared to be making a reference to Peter Strzok , a senior FBI official who travelled to London that month to meet the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer . Downer had agreed to speak with the FBI about a Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, who had told him that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee in the race. - The Guardian

In 2017, The Guardian reported that Britain's spy agencies had played a key role in alerting their American counterparts of communications between members of the Trump campaign and "suspected Russian agents," which was passed along to the US in what was characterized as a "routine exchange of information."

UK begged Trump not to declassify

In May, President Trump issued a sweeping declassification order on materials related to the DOJ/FBI Russia investigation - leaving it in the hands of Attorney General William Barr to determine exactly what happened to Trump and his campaign before and after the 2016 US election.

"For over a year, people have asked me to declassify. What I've done is declassified everything," said Trump, adding "He can look and I hope he looks at the UK and I hope he looks at Australia and I hope he looks at Ukraine ."

"It's the greatest hoax probably in the history of our country and somebody has to get to the bottom of it. We'll see. For a long period of time, they wanted me to declassify and I did."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/OqTdwruOJJo?start=150

Meanwhile, also in May, Fox News reported that the discredited "Steele Dossier" - assembled by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele - was referred to as "crown material" in an email exchange suggesting that former FBI Director James Comey insisted that CIA Director John Brennan pushed for the inclusion of the dossier in the intelligence community assessment (ICA) on Russian interference.

Moreover, much of "Operation Crossfire Hurricane" - the FBI's official investigation into the Trump campaign - occurred on UK soil , which is perhaps why the New York Times reported last September that the UK begged Trump not to declassify 'Russiagate' documents 'without redaction.'

Let's also not forget that shortly after Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos announced his intention to work for the campaign, he was lured to London in March, 2016, where Maltese professor and self-described Clinton foundation member Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer.

We wonder what else McCabe's texts with his MI-5 counterpart will reveal?

[Jul 29, 2019] Looks like E>pstein turned informant for Mueller s FBI in 2008. Likely earlier

Highly recommended!
Did Mueller done this at the request of Clintons?
Notable quotes:
"... That was while Robert Mueller ran the Bureau, which means everything about Epstein's blackmail and kompromat operation has been tucked safely away out of sight in FBI files for at least a decade. Much longer, new evidence shows. ..."
"... *CIA Acknowledged in 2003, It Knew that Ghislaine Maxwell's Late Father was a Major Foreign Intelligence Agent Operating Inside the U.S. ..."
"... That Robert Maxwell was a ruthless, corrupt, tax-dodging international businessman who served as an Israeli agent is highly probable. ..."
"... For the first time, Maxwell had failed to get his own way. He started to threaten and bluster. He then demanded that, for past services, he should receive immediately a quick fix of £400million to bale him out of his financial difficulties. ..."
"... Instead of providing the money, a small group of Mossad officers set about planning his murder. They feared that he was going to publicly expose all Mossad had done in the time he worked for them. They knew that he was gradually becoming mentally unstable and paranoid. He was taking a cocktail of drugs - Halcion and Zanax - which had serious side effects. ..."
"... Then Maxwell was contacted. He was told to fly to Gibraltar, go aboard the Lady Ghislaine and sail to the Canary Islands. There at sea he would receive his £400million quick fix in the form of a banker's draft. Maxwell did as he was told. ..."
"... As Victor Ostrovsky, a former Mossad agent told us: "On that cold night Mossad's problems with Robert Maxwell were over." ..."
"... The incontrovertible facts about his murder are contained in a previously-unseen autopsy report by Britain's then-leading forensic pathologist Dr Iain West and Israel State Pathologist Dr Yehuda Hiss. Of all the documents in our possession, these reports confirm the truth about Maxwell's death. ..."
"... Boy that Mueller has had a busy career hasn't he? Didn't he start out in Chicago where he gave Whitey Bulgar cover for being a mob boss? Then there's his cover up before and after 9/11. The weapons of mass destruction that he said Saddam had. The anthrax prosecution, Epstein's pedophilia cover up, HSBC and now he is trying to cover Hillary's buttocks. And maybe Obama's? I'm sure I've missed a few things that he did or didn't do. ..."
"... Acosta was told to stand down by someone at the top of the food chain. Mueller. Ugh what a slimy piece of work he is. But not to the Russia Gaters. Oh no. "He is a highly decorated marine who takes no guff from anyone. ..."
"... In that time, he had free access to Margaret Thatcher's Downing Street, to Ronald Reagan's White House, to the Kremlin and to the corridors of power throughout Europe. ..."
"... Inquiring minds want to know did Maxwell have access to Margaret and Ron because they liked him or because he had something on them? ..."
"... Epstein is the destruction of the Deep State. ..."
"... That pedophelia and politics scandal, better known as the Franklin Coverup, made the papers for a few months, too, before it was made to go away. Similarly, a couple of the operators served some time on reduced charges after that one. ..."
"... The two main suspects in the Bush, Sr. White House child ring were Craig Spence and Lawrence E. King Jr. King sang the National anthem at two GOP national conventions. He served time in jail for bank fraud. Spence was a Republican lobbyist before he committed suicide. Several of his partners went to jail for being involved in the adult part of the homosexual prostitution ring. ..."
"... Mueller's scrupulous avoidance of the CIA link in his prosecution of Manuel Noriega and his diversion of the PanAm 103 bombing and framing of two Libyans. Bobby Mueller has been a real go to guy when the security establishment needs a phony investigation. ..."
"... Bobby Mueller has been a real go to guy when the security establishment needs a phony investigation. ..."
"... The anthrax investigation is the most serious of his crimes. Mueller is being sued by his lead investigator in that case. ..."
"... Every now and then, here and there the curtain lifts for a moment and the political elite of a country, the business elite, the spy services, the military, and organized crime are revealed to be all working together, indeed practically joined at the hip ..."
"... partnership started during the early Cold War with US intelligence officers facilitating the drug trade out of Turkey and Burma through Europe. That soon spread to the Americas and globally. Covert operations such as Gladio, Condor, and the Safari Club, and associated banks (Franklin National Bank, BCCI, Riggs Bank, HSBC, etc.) produced massive human rights violations, transnational terrorism and governmental corruption. The CIA's secret wars provided funds and official cover for private-public sector alliance of criminals, bankers and spooks around the world. ..."
"... The CIA, MI6 and Mossad ran overlapping coordinated operations using privateers, paramilitaries and organized crime networks that consumed vast amounts of cash generated by money laundering mechanisms. Enriched by the looting of the former Soviet Union, along with the infusion of Arab oil money (the Saudi Yamamah slush fund), the "Octopus" became the instrument of Oligarchs that have thoroughly corrupted western governments and secret services. ..."
"... The Snowden release included a number of documents that illustrate the on-line entrapment and political disruption activities run by the two main communications intelligence agencies. ..."
"... Epstein recruits young girls, throws parties where he invites potential hedge fund clients, lets nature take its course and films the proceedings, extracts blackmail in the form of investments to his (largely fake) hedge fund, which actually just buys an index fund (no actual fund management required). He takes a percentage from the coerced investments. Nobody talks because they have too much to lose. No suspicious payments to raise eyebrows at the IRS. ..."
"... Epstein brought in the clients. The CIA/MI-6/Mossad provided necessary cover from the FBI and local cops - then, three or four agencies shared the intelligence take, as they had for decades from Robert Maxwell's operations. ..."
"... For Ghislaine, it was simply carrying on the family business for fun and profit. For the spooks, it was business as usual going back to the Green House, the Berlin bordello founded in the the 1870s by Wilhelm Steiber, a Prussian Police section chief, to provide useful intelligence to Bismarck's Military Intelligence, which he reorganized. ..."
"... Epstein is also well acquainted with University President Lawrence H. Summers. The two serve together on the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, two elite international relations organizations. ..."
"... Epstein's relationships within the academy are remarkable since the tycoon, who has amassed his fortune by managing the wealth of billionaires from his private Caribbean island, does not hold a bachelor's degree. ..."
"... There's a rocky road ahead for Larry Summers. Summers introduces Epstein into the Harvard fold, but becomes reckless with his newly-refined Neoliberalism and his opinions concerning "lady scholars." ..."
Jul 11, 2019 | caucus99percent.com

leveymg on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 11:30am

That was while Robert Mueller ran the Bureau, which means everything about Epstein's blackmail and kompromat operation has been tucked safely away out of sight in FBI files for at least a decade. Much longer, new evidence shows.

For those who may have wondered why Epstein was given such an incredible deal in sentencing, that explains it. Epstein was an extraordinary value informant, and he leveraged it. https://truepundit.com/fbi-pedophile-jeffrey-epstein-was-informant-for-m...

A figure who often gets overlooked in this is Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's chief procurer of underage girls. Ghislaine, the daughter of publishing magnate Robert Maxwell, was granted immunity and never charged in exchange for her own cooperation in the 2008 pseudo-prosecution. https://heavy.com/news/2019/03/ghislaine-maxwell/ ; https://pagesix.com/2016/03/17/alleged-epstein-madam-forced-to-hand-over...

The real question is, why did the FBI wait for more than a decade to bust Epstein and Maxwell?

Epstein and Maxwell came to the attention of the FBI in 1996, when, curiously, the Bureau never acted on an accusation that they had together sexually abused a 15 year old girl in a bedroom inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. Documents in a recent law suit filed by an alleged victim, Maria Farmer, show that the FBI had been aware of Epstein and Maxwell's child abuse activities in New York for at least a dozen years before Epstein was finally charged in 2008 with much-reduced Florida state offenses. https://www.yourtango.com/2019323698/who-maria-farmer-latest-woman-accus...

Farmer claims she reported her sexual assault to New York police and the FBI in 1996. "To my knowledge, I was the first person to report Maxwell and Epstein to the FBI," she wrote in her affidavit."

*CIA Acknowledged in 2003, It Knew that Ghislaine Maxwell's Late Father was a Major Foreign Intelligence Agent Operating Inside the U.S.

Previously, Robert Maxwell, Ghislaine's father, had for many years been known to have been involved in high-level espionage in the United States, as detailed in a 2003 publication of the CIA Center for the Study of Intelligence, The Intelligence Officer's Bookshelf . Therein, the CIA reviewer of a biography by British author Gordon Thomas acknowledged about Maxwell: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-pub...

That Robert Maxwell was a ruthless, corrupt, tax-dodging international businessman who served as an Israeli agent is highly probable.

For the deeper background to the Epstein-Maxwell multinational blackmail, coverup and kompromat operation, we have to look at the events that led up to the 1991 death of Robert Maxwell. A summary of the Maxwell bio by its authors recounts:

British Publisher Robert Maxwell
Was Mossad Spy
By Gordon Thomas And Martin Dillon
The Mirror - UK
12-6-2002
[ . . .]
Eleven years after former Daily Mirror owner Robert Maxwell plunged from his luxury yacht to a watery grave, his death still arouses intense interest.

Many different theories have circulated about what really happened on board the Lady Ghislaine that night in May 1991.

[ . . . ]

The Jewish millionaire and former Labour MP [born Ludvik Hoch
in Czechoslovakia] died the way he had lived - threatening.

He had threatened his wife. Threatened his children. Threatened the staff of this newspaper.

But finally he issued one threat too many - he threatened Mossad.

He told them that unless they gave him £400million to save his crumbling empire, he would expose all he had done for them.

In that time, he had free access to Margaret Thatcher's Downing Street, to Ronald Reagan's White House, to the Kremlin and to the corridors of power throughout Europe.

On top of that he had built himself a position of power within the crime families of eastern Europe, teaching them how to funnel their vast wealth from drugs, arms smuggling and prostitution to banks in safe havens around the globe.

Maxwell passed on all the secrets he learned to Mossad in Tel Aviv. In turn, they tolerated his excesses, vanities and insatiable appetite for a luxurious lifestyle and women.

He told his controllers who they should target and how they should do it. He appointed himself as Israel's unofficial ambassador to the Soviet Bloc. Mossad saw the advantage in that.

[ . . . ]

The more successful Maxwell became the more risks he took and the more dangerous he was to Mossad. At the same time, the very public side of Maxwell, who then owned 400 companies, began to unwind.

He spent lavishly and lost money on deals. The more he lost, the more he tried to claw money from the banks. Then he saw a way out of his problems.

He was approached by Vladimir Kryuchkov, head of the KGB. Spymaster and tycoon met in the utmost secrecy in the Kremlin.

Kryuchkov had an extraordinary proposal. He wanted Maxwell to help orchestrate the overthrow of Mikhail Gorbachev, the reformist Soviet leader. That would bring to an end a fledgling democracy and a return to the Cold War days.

In return, Maxwell's massive debts would be wiped out by a grateful Kryuchkov, who planned to replace Gorbachev. The KGB chief wanted Maxwell to use the Lady Ghislaine, named after Maxwell's daughter, as a meeting place between the Russian plotters, Mossad chiefs and Israel's top politicians.

The plan was for the Israelis to go to Washington and say that democracy could not work in Russia and that it was better to allow the country to return to a modified form of communism, which America could help to control. In return, Kryuchkov would guarantee to free hundreds of thousands of Jews and dissidents in the Soviet republics.

Kryuchkov told Maxwell that he would be seen as a saviour of all those Jews. It was a proposal he could not refuse. But when he put it to his Mossad controllers they were horrified. They said Israel would have no part in such a madcap plan.

For the first time, Maxwell had failed to get his own way. He started to threaten and bluster. He then demanded that, for past services, he should receive immediately a quick fix of £400million to bale him out of his financial difficulties.

Instead of providing the money, a small group of Mossad officers set about planning his murder. They feared that he was going to publicly expose all Mossad had done in the time he worked for them. They knew that he was gradually becoming mentally unstable and paranoid. He was taking a cocktail of drugs - Halcion and Zanax - which had serious side effects.

The group of Mossad plotters sensed, like Solomon, he could bring their temple tumbling down and cause incalculable harm to Israel. The plan to kill him was prepared in the utmost secrecy. A four-man squad was briefed.

Then Maxwell was contacted. He was told to fly to Gibraltar, go aboard the Lady Ghislaine and sail to the Canary Islands. There at sea he would receive his £400million quick fix in the form of a banker's draft. Maxwell did as he was told.

On the night of November 4, 1991, the Lady Ghislaine, one of the world's biggest yachts, was at sea.

[ . . . ]

As Victor Ostrovsky, a former Mossad agent told us: "On that cold night Mossad's problems with Robert Maxwell were over."

The incontrovertible facts about his murder are contained in a previously-unseen autopsy report by Britain's then-leading forensic pathologist Dr Iain West and Israel State Pathologist Dr Yehuda Hiss. Of all the documents in our possession, these reports confirm the truth about Maxwell's death.

Gordon Thomas & Martin Dillon are authors of The Assassination of Robert Maxwell: Israel's Super Spy, published by Robson Books.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12419168&method=f...

The obvious question, why did the U.S. government let these intelligence crimes continue for decades, isn't being asked. The answer is almost self-evident. Information and leverage obtained by Maxwell-Epstein and Co. was far too valuable to its several operators to let it all end too soon.

###

Linda Wood on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 12:45pm
Two parts of your reporting

leap out at me as suggesting how Epstein connects to much bigger subjects. First is the assertion that Maxwell was

... teaching them how to funnel their vast wealth from drugs, arms smuggling and prostitution to banks in safe havens around the globe.

This area of trafficking and money laundering directly connects to Mueller and his essential exoneration of HSBC .

The other quotation that suggests the importance of money laundering is here:

The plan was for the Israelis to go to Washington and say that democracy could not work in Russia and that it was better to allow the country to return to a modified form of communism, which America could help to control.

The life's work of Antony Sutton at Stanford's Hoover Institution shows that American industry was ALWAYS controlling communism as well as Soviet industrial development, and that a trend toward social democracy, represented by Gorbachev, would have put an end to that control.

leveymg on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 4:29pm
Curiously, the CIA review of the Maxwell bio doesn't touch on

@Linda Wood his money laundering and blackmailing activities. While the review confirms that Robert Maxwell was for decades a major Mossad agent actively setting up operations and cover in the United States and the UK, I can only surmise that the spreading political influence of Eastern European organized crime networks and child honey traps are things that the Agency didn't want to discuss publicly in 2003.

As for Mueller, let's not forget that he was FBI Director and before that the head of the Criminal Division at Main Justice at the time that global "black finance" grew along with the catastrophic spread of multinational crime and terrorism. BCCI, Iran-Contra, 9/11, and the rise of transnational Oligarchs happened on his watch. As the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the United States at the time, it is hard to imagine anyone more responsibility for the ultimate consequences than Robert Mueller. There is perhaps someone who bears ultimate responsibility, the President who appointed Mueller: George Herbert Walker Bush and his lesser son, Shrub, who promoted him.

Pluto's Republic on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 5:21pm
From your own research

@leveymg

... wouldn't you assume that this entire affair is an ongoing Mossad operation, which may or may not have concluded? The US IC is just another operative inside the envelope, but Mossad owns the assets and the intellectual property. I think we could assume that some of this is automated and Mossad has ongoing leverage still in play.

The obvious question, why did the U.S. government let these intelligence crimes continue for decades, isn't being asked. The answer is almost self-evident. Information and leverage obtained by Maxwell-Epstein and Co. was far too valuable to its several operators to let it all end too soon.

.

Mossad's legendary blackmail traps ensnared even high-level deep state authorities and made them pliable. The recent history of United States foreign policy is an enigma that can only be solved when that assumption is inserted. Once the assumption is in place, it opens like a Pandora's box. Don't you find that to be the case?

Thanks for compiling this revealing argument.

Deja on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 11:03pm
HSBC?

@Linda Wood
From your link:

In a recent investigation I presented the case that British banking and financial giant HSBC conspired with banking institutions with documented links to terrorist financing, including those responsible for helping bankroll the 9/11 attacks.

Thank you for the link!

Linda Wood on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 1:11pm
HSBC article

linked here does not mention Mueller but does outline the crimes Mueller worked so hard not to solve:

http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com/2012/07/black-dossier-hsbc-terro...

SUNDAY, JULY 29, 2012
Black Dossier: HSBC & Terrorist Finance

Moral equivalencies abound. After all, when American secret state agencies manage drug flows or direct terrorist proxies to attack official enemies it's not quite the same as battling terror or crime.

Pounding home that point, a new report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations accused HSBC of exposing "the U.S. financial system to a wide array of money laundering, drug trafficking, and terrorist financing risks due to poor anti-money laundering (AML) controls."

That 335-page report, "U.S. Vulnerabilities to Money Laundering, Drugs, and Terrorist Financing: HSBC Case History," (large pdf file available here ) was issued after a year-long Senate investigation zeroed-in on the bank's U.S. affiliate, HSBC Bank USA, N.A., better known as HBUS.

Drilling down, we learned that amongst the "services" offered by HSBC subsidiaries and correspondent banks were sweet deals with financial entities with terrorist ties; the transportation of billions of dollars in cash by plane and armored car through their London Banknotes division; the clearing of sequentially-numbered travelers checks through dodgy Cayman Islands accounts for Mexican drug lords and Russian mafiosi.

From richly-appointed suites at Canary Wharf, London, the bank's "smartest guys in the room" handed some of the most violent gangsters on earth the financial wherewithal to organize their respective industries: global crime.

A case in point. In 2008 alone the Senate revealed that the bank's Cayman Islands branch handled some 50,000 client accounts (all without benefit of offices or staff on Grand Cayman, mind you), yet still managed to ship some $7 billion (£10.9bn) in cash from Mexico into the U.S. Now that's creative accounting!...

Alligator Ed on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 10:49pm
Thank you, Linda

@Linda Wood HSBC, huh--there must be some clever name for it, which deserves no research.
what an eloquent article you presented. Brief but right on target. It isn't just sex, drugs and rock and roll. Now it is drugs - money -sexual perversion--and perhaps worse? Rumors are flying about what video on the Weiner laptop showed. It is strictly heresay, but a core of folks seem to believe the suspicions are possible.

snoopydawg on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 8:48pm
Boy that Mueller has had a busy career hasn't he? Didn't he start out in Chicago where he gave Whitey Bulgar cover for being a mob boss? Then there's his cover up before and after 9/11. The weapons of mass destruction that he said Saddam had. The anthrax prosecution, Epstein's pedophilia cover up, HSBC and now he is trying to cover Hillary's buttocks. And maybe Obama's? I'm sure I've missed a few things that he did or didn't do.

Acosta is saying that if he hadn't made the plea deal then Epstein would never have served any time in prison. Well he actually only slept there since he got to leave every day for work and then there's the massages he got after his busy day at work. But there were more than 80 pages that the Feds wrote on his escapades so I think that story he told congress is true. Acosta was told to stand down by someone at the top of the food chain. Mueller. Ugh what a slimy piece of work he is. But not to the Russia Gaters. Oh no. "He is a highly decorated marine who takes no guff from anyone.

In that time, he had free access to Margaret Thatcher's Downing Street, to Ronald Reagan's White House, to the Kremlin and to the corridors of power throughout Europe.

Inquiring minds want to know did Maxwell have access to Margaret and Ron because they liked him or because he had something on them?

Great information! The more I learn the more I need a shower.

Linda Wood on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 9:11pm
That needing a shower thing

@snoopydawg

is how I've been feeling all week from reading about this, just more and more demoralized when I think about the depravation of our so-called "leadership." What is it that we're supposed to think of as the new normal after this behavior?

Alligator Ed on Thu, 07/11/2019 - 10:53pm
Linda, you could shower in my extra long tub

@Linda Wood No problem--but, seriously, yecch! Epstein is the destruction of the Deep State.

leveymg on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 1:02pm
Remember Craig Spence and the 1989 Whitehouse Call Boy Ring?

@snoopydawg

That pedophelia and politics scandal, better known as the Franklin Coverup, made the papers for a few months, too, before it was made to go away. Similarly, a couple of the operators served some time on reduced charges after that one.

The two main suspects in the Bush, Sr. White House child ring were Craig Spence and Lawrence E. King Jr. King sang the National anthem at two GOP national conventions. He served time in jail for bank fraud. Spence was a Republican lobbyist before he committed suicide. Several of his partners went to jail for being involved in the adult part of the homosexual prostitution ring.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/Franklin/FranklinCoverup/l...

Roy Blakeley on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 12:29pm
And let's not forget

@snoopydawg

Mueller's scrupulous avoidance of the CIA link in his prosecution of Manuel Noriega and his diversion of the PanAm 103 bombing and framing of two Libyans. Bobby Mueller has been a real go to guy when the security establishment needs a phony investigation.

Linda Wood on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 1:09pm
Absolutely.

@Roy Blakeley

You sum it up perfectly:

Bobby Mueller has been a real go to guy when the security establishment needs a phony investigation.

The anthrax investigation is the most serious of his crimes. Mueller is being sued by his lead investigator in that case.

Because researchers in our biological weapons labs went public with what they were doing, and where such research was being done in the U.S., we learned the CIA was one of several outfits doing biological weapons research.

But Mueller exonerated all of them, including the CIA, with no explanation and only focused on a lone vaccine researcher at the Army lab when journalists began to ask why no one had been indicted after seven years of investigation, at which point the FBI attempted to harass the suspect into committing suicide.

lotlizard on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 1:44am
Comparable to "Deep State" scandals in Turkey?

Every now and then, here and there the curtain lifts for a moment and the political elite of a country, the business elite, the spy services, the military, and organized crime are revealed to be all working together, indeed practically joined at the hip.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susurluk_scandal

https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/ergenekon-plot-massive-trial-...

leveymg on Sat, 07/13/2019 - 11:08am
Read "Politics of Heroin in SE Asia". The CIA-Mafia-warlord

@lotlizard @lotlizard

partnership started during the early Cold War with US intelligence officers facilitating the drug trade out of Turkey and Burma through Europe. That soon spread to the Americas and globally. Covert operations such as Gladio, Condor, and the Safari Club, and associated banks (Franklin National Bank, BCCI, Riggs Bank, HSBC, etc.) produced massive human rights violations, transnational terrorism and governmental corruption. The CIA's secret wars provided funds and official cover for private-public sector alliance of criminals, bankers and spooks around the world.

This "dark alliance" assumed a political and economic life of its own beyond its original intent to counter communist movements. By the Vietnam War, Agency operators were running most of the heroin trade in the world through proprietary airlines, banks and logistics companies. In the mid-1970s, CIA Director Bush expanded privatization with Saudi funding in his Safari Club deal that eventually morphed into Al Qaeda and ISIS.

The CIA, MI6 and Mossad ran overlapping coordinated operations using privateers, paramilitaries and organized crime networks that consumed vast amounts of cash generated by money laundering mechanisms. Enriched by the looting of the former Soviet Union, along with the infusion of Arab oil money (the Saudi Yamamah slush fund), the "Octopus" became the instrument of Oligarchs that have thoroughly corrupted western governments and secret services.

Multinational honey trap operations such as Maxwell-Epstein & Co. are an inevitable and continuing part of this privatization and criminalization of intelligence that stretches back to the days of Tom Braden and Cord Meyer handing out stacks of greenbacks to Mafiosi on the Corsican Docks.

leveymg on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 11:31am
NSA and GCHQ have gotten into the honeytrap and influence game

@leveymg

The Snowden release included a number of documents that illustrate the on-line entrapment and political disruption activities run by the two main communications intelligence agencies.

"Honey-trap; a great option. Very successful, when it works" (GCHQ, UK training program slide)

https://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2014/05/lots-of-secret-nsa-documents-plu...

The "Information Ops" category is of particular interest to me...

Does this really seem like the sort of thing that would be done only to a jihadist...?

WoodsDweller on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 1:48pm
Here's an interesting take

https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/epstein-was-running-a-blackmail-scheme-...

Without quoting the whole thing (which is worth a read):

Epstein recruits young girls, throws parties where he invites potential hedge fund clients, lets nature take its course and films the proceedings, extracts blackmail in the form of investments to his (largely fake) hedge fund, which actually just buys an index fund (no actual fund management required). He takes a percentage from the coerced investments. Nobody talks because they have too much to lose. No suspicious payments to raise eyebrows at the IRS.

There's no need to invoke the Mafia/Russia/Mossad/CIA/etc, that's just needlessly overfitting.

Except such an operation would be quite attractive to intelligence services. Maybe they were in on the ground floor, maybe they made Epstein an offer he couldn't refuse once they heard about it.

leveymg on Sat, 07/13/2019 - 10:28am
My gut tells me that G. Maxwell provided the Know-how, and

@WoodsDweller

Epstein brought in the clients. The CIA/MI-6/Mossad provided necessary cover from the FBI and local cops - then, three or four agencies shared the intelligence take, as they had for decades from Robert Maxwell's operations.

For Ghislaine, it was simply carrying on the family business for fun and profit. For the spooks, it was business as usual going back to the Green House, the Berlin bordello founded in the the 1870s by Wilhelm Steiber, a Prussian Police section chief, to provide useful intelligence to Bismarck's Military Intelligence, which he reorganized.

Steiber is considered the father of modern espionage. His methods were vastly influential, and he attracted students from London, St. Petersburg to Tokyo. Each put their own national spin on the science of sexual blackmail. As for the Japanese, they are among the most interesting and innovative in their use of a parallel network of privatized intelligence services incorporating underworld Yakuzi groups alongside conventional military intelligence units. Using compromise, they gained and maintained control over Imperial Japan and its Colonies: https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2019/03/15/eastern-peril/

To realize these divinely inspired ambitions, Japan needed a modern espionage system. Adopting the German model, Japanese officials were sent to study under Wilhelm Stieber in the mid-1870s. Over the next decade Japan built up separate army and naval intelligence services, each with an accompanying branch of secret military police (Kempeitai for the army and Tokeitai for the navy). These latter organizations also provided an excellent counter-espionage service. However, where the Japanese were unique was in the use of spies belonging to unofficial secret societies working alongside or independently of the official intelligence agencies. These shadowy institutions were ultra-nationalist by nature, drawing their membership from a cross-section of Japanese society, including the military, politics, industry and Yakuza underworld. Under ruthless leadership, their henchmen would spy on, subvert and corrupt Japan's Far East neighbours.

For more on Steiber and his superior, von Hinckeldey, methods of international counter-insurgency, espionage, and political policing included deception and a forerunner of today's internet surveillance: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2006/11/29/275653/-

While armies are essential to the maintenance of autocracy, the preservation of dynastic rule and the prevention of democracy requires an effective secret police. The suppression of its middle-class constitutionalists [during the 1840s] was followed by the expansion of the Prussian political police under Karl Ludwig Friedrich von Hinckeldey.

Appointed police president of Berlin in late 1848, Hinckeldey was an innovator of many of the features of modern systematic political policing. Among the tactics that he introduced with his new police system in Berlin was the "Litfass columns". Named for Ernst Litfass, Frederick William's court printer, he had dozens of these large poles erected in strategic spots around Berlin. The public posting of political notices was then banned. By application to a state office for a waiver, however, the columns could be used to display messages. The police dutifully recorded the names of all who had applied. A. Richie, Faust's Metropolis: A History of Berlin, New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, 1998 at p.134.

LEGACY OF THE LITFASS COLUMNS: A similar ploy was later adopted by the People's Republic of China. In the mid-1980s, the Communist authorities at first appear to tolerate the operation of a so-called Democracy Wall, where "dissidents" in Beijing could post political writings, initially, without being arrested. Similar walls then sprung up under the noses of the authorities in other Chinese cities. For this apparent opening to democracy, the Deng regime much applauded, particularly by some in the Reagan-Bush Administration, eager to legitimize the regime and its growing commercial ties with U.S. corporations. Eventually, many of those who had availed themselves of the wall to post political messages were, of course, arrested in the roundup of hundreds of thousands of democracy supporters that followed the Tienamen Square massacre. The impression of anonymity and "freedom" conveyed by the Internet, of course, presents a similar opportunity for police to cast a wide net for identifying persons and organizations who may not hold favor for the regime in power, or may not in the future.

Hinckeldey also founded the Police Union, the first recorded international network of counterrevolutionary police spies in modern times. Primarily made up of police officers from Prussia and the German states, the Union operated throughout Europe, Britain and in the United States. The Union was run by his deputy, the notorious police provocateur, Wilhelm Steiber, who would later reorganize the Okhrana along similar lines. Internationally active from 1851-1866, the Police Union, according to Mathieu Deflem, was "one of the first formal initiatives in industrial society to establish an organized police system across national borders."13

I disagree with the Alternet view on this. See, this is the norm. A purely private sexual blackmail ring of any scale would be the historical exception. It certainly wouldn't survive very long.

Pluto's Republic on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 5:45pm
This is a chilling thought I try to avoid.

@leveymg

...authorities at first appear to tolerate the operation of a so-called Democracy Wall, where "dissidents" in Beijing could post political writings.... Similar walls then sprung up under the noses of the authorities in other Chinese cities. Eventually, many of those who had availed themselves of the wall to post political messages were, of course, arrested in the roundup of hundreds of thousands of democracy supporters....

The impression of anonymity and "freedom" conveyed by the Internet, of course, presents a similar opportunity for police to cast a wide net for identifying persons and organizations who may not hold favor for the regime in power, or may not in the future.

But why should one avoid the thought? If the situation looks like the people are going to lose the war for their minds, and are unwilling to back a publisher like Assange who has given his all to try to empower them, why should anyone put themselves at risk by expressing their opinions? It's a honeypot of our own making, just as Facebook is where people go to write their own dossiers for the Authorities.

leveymg on Sat, 07/13/2019 - 10:36am
Every time you entrap yourself as

@Pluto's Republic an enemy of the status quo, you raise the calculated costs of the eventual crackdown, pushing back the day of reckoning. Keep it up! Visible rebellion is the only defense of the people.

Pluto's Republic on Fri, 07/12/2019 - 5:54pm
Background: If someone were to choose the ideal node

...from which to leverage access to the elite, Harvard University would be a top choice.

Jeffery Epstein actually entered the social salons of the elite through many doors. He was, of course, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. One would have to be to rub shoulders with the political elite. From there he matriculated to the Trilateral Commission becoming friendly with Harvard President, Larry Summers. **

Becoming a surprise mystery philanthropist at Harvard, with Summers help, was a booster rocket for Epstein. In the Havard Crimson , in June 2003, Epstein's involvement with Harvard was celebrated.

People in the News: Jeffrey E. Epstein

Elusive financier Jeffrey E. Epstein donated $30 million this year to Harvard for the founding of a mathematical biology and evolutionary dynamics program.

While the mathematics teacher turned magnate remained unknown to most people until he flew President Clinton, Kevin Spacey and Chris Tucker to Africa to explore the problems of AIDS and economic development facing the region, Epstein has been a familiar face to many at Harvard for years.

Networking with the University's leading intellectuals, Epstein has spurred research through both discussions with and dollars contributed to various faculty members.

Lindsley Professor of Psychology Stephen M. Kosslyn, former Dean of the Faculty Henry A. Rosovsky and Frankfurter Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz are among Epstein's bevy of eminent friends that includes princes, presidents and Nobel Prize winners.

Epstein is also well acquainted with University President Lawrence H. Summers. The two serve together on the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, two elite international relations organizations.

Epstein's collection of high-profile friends also includes newly-recruited professor Martin A. Nowak, who will run Harvard's mathematical biology and evolutionary dynamics program.

Like Kosslyn, Rosovsky and Dershowitz, Nowak praises Epstein's numerous relationships within the scientific community.

"I am amazed by the connections he has in the scientific world," Nowak says. "He knows an amazing number of scientists. He knows everyone you can imagine."

Epstein's relationships within the academy are remarkable since the tycoon, who has amassed his fortune by managing the wealth of billionaires from his private Caribbean island, does not hold a bachelor's degree.

Yet, friends and beneficiaries say they do not see Epstein merely as a man with deep pockets, but as an intellectual equal.

Dershowitz says Epstein is "brilliant" and Kosslyn calls Epstein "one of the brightest people I've ever known."

Epstein's beneficiaries say they are particularly appreciative of the no-strings-attached approach Epstein takes with his donations.

"He is one of the most pleasant philanthropists," Nowak says. "Unlike many people who support science, he supports science without any conditions. There are not any disadvantages to associating with him."

Friends and associates say Harvard stands to benefit from its evolving relationship with Epstein.

"I hope that he will, over time, become one of the leading supporters of science at Harvard," Rosovsky writes in an e-mail.

__________________________________________
** A footnote on Larry Summers seems important here: Harvard-trained economists have been running the US economy for a very long time, and continue to do so. Summers began his ascent as a professor of economics at Harvard University, leaving shortly before Bill Clinton won the Presidency. He was clearly the Neoliberal seed planted for the New American Century.

In 1993, Summers was appointed Undersecretary for International Affairs of the United States Department of the Treasury under the Clinton Administration. In 1995, he was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin. In 1999, he succeeded Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury.

While working for the Clinton administration Summers played a leading role in the American response to the 1994 economic crisis in Mexico, the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and the Russian financial crisis. He was also influential in the Harvard Institute for International Development and American-advised privatization of the economies of the post-Soviet states, and in the deregulation of the U.S financial system, including the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

At This Point the Ball is Passed to the Bush Team Republicans, while the Democrats Sit Back and Wait for 2008.

There's now a Treasury surplus to transfer to the wealthy, and the necessary deregulation for Wall Street empowerment is in place. The Soviet era had ended and Russia is ended forever. The world is finally primed to be seized by the One Exceptional Power. It's 2001, and we are standing on the threshold of the New American Century . Time to throw a flash-bang of chaos onto the world stage and trigger the booming War Economy that will carry us directly to global control.

There's a rocky road ahead for Larry Summers. Summers introduces Epstein into the Harvard fold, but becomes reckless with his newly-refined Neoliberalism and his opinions concerning "lady scholars."

Following the end of Clinton's term, Summers served as the 27th President of Harvard University from 2001 to 2006. Summers resigned as Harvard's president in the wake of a no-confidence vote by Harvard faculty, which resulted in large part from Summers's conflict with Cornel West, financial conflict of interest questions regarding his relationship with Andrei Shleifer, and a 2005 speech in which he suggested that the under-representation of women in science and engineering could be due to a "different availability of aptitude at the high end", and less to patterns of discrimination and socialization. Remarking upon political correctness in institutions of higher education, Summers said in 2016:

Summers resigned as Harvard's president in the wake of a no-confidence vote by Harvard faculty, which resulted in large part from Summers's conflict with Cornel West, financial conflict of interest questions regarding his relationship with Andrei Shleifer, and a 2005 speech in which he suggested that the under-representation of women in science and engineering

There is a great deal of absurd political correctness. Now, I'm somebody who believes very strongly in diversity, who resists racism in all of its many incarnations, who thinks that there is a great deal that's unjust in American society that needs to be combated, but it seems to be that there is a kind of creeping totalitarianism in terms of what kind of ideas are acceptable and are debatable on college campuses.

After his departure from Harvard, Summers cooled his jets on Wall Street, positioning himself to be called back into the game when it was Team Democrat's turn in 2008.

Summers worked as a managing partner at the hedge fund D. E. Shaw & Co., and as a freelance speaker at other financial institutions, including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers. Summers rejoined public service during the Obama administration, serving as the Director of the White House United States National Economic Council for President Barack Obama from January 2009 until November 2010, where he emerged as a key economic decision-maker in the Obama administration's response to the Great Recession.

Jeffery Epstein continued to weave himself into the fabric of government like a good psychopath would. He was by no means the only one.

[Jul 29, 2019] Democrats Blowing on Embers With a Politicized Mueller by Joe Lauria

Notable quotes:
"... Former Russiagate special counsel Robert Mueller's appearance before the Democratic-controlled House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees on Wednesday was an exercise by the Democrats of trying to extract statements that would keep Russiagate alive and an attempt by the Republicans to finish off the story once and for all. ..."
"... Appearing to be feigning, or actually suffering early signs of senility, the nearly 75-year old Mueller disappointed both parties and the public. He declined to answer 198 questions, according to a count by NBC News. When he did answer he was often barely intelligible and mostly stuck to what was in his final report, though he often had to fumble through pages to find passages he could not recall, eating into committee members' five-minute time limit. ..."
"... Among the inaccuracies about Russiagate that were recycled at the hearing is that the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency spent $1.25 million in the United States to influence the election. That figure belonged to a unit that acted worldwide, not just in the U.S., according to Mueller's indictment . In fact it only spent $100,000 on Facebook ads, half coming after the election, and as even Mueller pointed out, some were anti-Trump. ..."
"... Cambridge Analytica , by contrast, had 5,000 data points on 240 million Americans, some of it bought from Facebook, that gave an enormous advantage for targeted ads to the Trump campaign, which says it put out 5.9 million Facebook ads based on this data. It paid at least $5.9 million to the company co-founded by Trump's campaign strategist Steve Bannon. But we are supposed to believe that a comparatively paltry number of social media messages from the IRA threw the election. ..."
"... Pointing to a CNN headline that had just appeared, "MUELLER: TRUMP WAS NOT EXONERATED," Turner said: "What you know is, that this can't say, 'Mueller exonerated Trump,' because you don't have the power or authority to exonerate Trump. You have no more power to declare him exonerated than you have the power to declare him Anderson Cooper." ..."
"... Turner said: "The statement about exoneration is misleading, and it's meaningless. It colors this investigation -- one word of out the entire portion of your report. And it's a meaningless word that has no legal meaning, and it has colored your entire report." ..."
"... Consortium News ..."
"... Russiagate relies on deep delusion and deep irrational prejudices. It's perhaps comparable to the Dreyfus Affair. ..."
"... Mueller knows he as a supposed attorney officer of the court was completely unprofessional in his words actions and mostly inactions towards obvious fraud and conspiracy of MI5 and the entire DNC. ..."
"... I think it is a profound error to view Russiagate as Democrats v. Republicans. It is Washington insiders versus outsiders, establishment versus non-establishment, Washington bureaucracy against the rest of the country, Deep State versus the will of the voters. The same kind of sham investigation would be occurring if it had been outsider Sanders winning in 2016 as opposed to outsider Trump. ..."
"... I think there is so much networked crime and mutual blackmail in the US government that nothing will ever be done about this ..."
Jul 25, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

Democrats Blowing on Embers With a Politicized Mueller July 25, 2019 • 123 Comments

Robert Mueller appeared to have difficulty understanding and answering questions during his day-long hearings on Wednesday but snapped to attention to make political points, says Joe Lauria.

Former Russiagate special counsel Robert Mueller's appearance before the Democratic-controlled House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees on Wednesday was an exercise by the Democrats of trying to extract statements that would keep Russiagate alive and an attempt by the Republicans to finish off the story once and for all.

Appearing to be feigning, or actually suffering early signs of senility, the nearly 75-year old Mueller disappointed both parties and the public. He declined to answer 198 questions, according to a count by NBC News. When he did answer he was often barely intelligible and mostly stuck to what was in his final report, though he often had to fumble through pages to find passages he could not recall, eating into committee members' five-minute time limit.

Mueller especially refused to comment on the process of his investigation, such as who he did or did not interview, what countries his investigators visited and he even dodged discussing some relevant points of law. It was an abdication of his responsibility to U.S. taxpayers who footed his roughly $30-million, 22-month probe.

But when it came to making political statements, the former FBI director suddenly rediscovered his mental acuity. He went way beyond his report to say, without prosecutorial evidence, that he agreed with the assessment of then CIA Director Mike Pompeo that WikiLeaks is a "non-state, hostile intelligence agency."

Mueller called "illegal" WikiLeak 's obtaining the Podesta and DNC emails, an act of journalism. In the 2016 election, the Espionage Act would not apply as the DNC and Podesta emails were not classified. Nor has WikiLeaks been accused by anyone of stealing the emails. And yet the foremost law enforcement figure in the U.S. accused WikiLeaks of breaking the law merely for publishing.

Though Mueller's report makes no mention of The Guardian 's tale that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort visited WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy, when questioned on this, Mueller refused to refute the story, for which there isn't a scrap of evidence. That was another purely political and not legal intervention from the lawman.

Russia, Russia, Russia

Mueller: Came to when he wanted to make a political point. (C-Span screenshot)

While Mueller concluded there was no evidence of a conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign to throw the 2016 election, he has not let up on the most politicized part of his message: that Russia interfered "massively" in "our democracy" and is still doing it. There was no waffling from Mueller when it came to this question.

He bases this on his indictment of 12 GRU Russian military intelligence agents whom he alleges hacked the DNC emails and transmitted them to WikiLeaks . Mueller knows those agents will never be arrested and brought to a courtroom to have his charges tested. In that sense the indictment was less a legal than a political document.

Among the inaccuracies about Russiagate that were recycled at the hearing is that the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency spent $1.25 million in the United States to influence the election. That figure belonged to a unit that acted worldwide, not just in the U.S., according to Mueller's indictment . In fact it only spent $100,000 on Facebook ads, half coming after the election, and as even Mueller pointed out, some were anti-Trump.

Cambridge Analytica , by contrast, had 5,000 data points on 240 million Americans, some of it bought from Facebook, that gave an enormous advantage for targeted ads to the Trump campaign, which says it put out 5.9 million Facebook ads based on this data. It paid at least $5.9 million to the company co-founded by Trump's campaign strategist Steve Bannon. But we are supposed to believe that a comparatively paltry number of social media messages from the IRA threw the election.

Mueller implied in his testimony that there was a link between the IRA and the Russian government despite an order from a judge for him to stop making that connection. In focusing again on Russia, no member of Congress from either party raised the content of the leaked emails.

For the Democrats especially, it is all about the source, who is irrelevant, since no one disputes the accuracy of the emails that exposed Hillary Clinton. (That the source of authentic documents is irrelevant is demonstrated by The Wall Street Journal and other major media using anonymous drop boxes pioneered by WikiLeaks. ) Were a foreign power to spread disinformation about candidates in a U.S. election (something the candidates do to each other all the time) that would be sabotage. But the leaking and publication of the Clinton emails was information valuable to American voters. And WikiLeaks would have published Trump emails, but it never received any, Editor-in-Chief Kristinn Hrafnsson told Consortium New 's webcast CN Live!

No Power to Exonerate

With "collusion" off the table, the Democrats have been obsessed with Trump allegedly obstructing an investigation that found no underlying crime. That's something like being arrested for resisting arrest when you've committed no other infraction.

In his morning testimony, Mueller amplified the misperception that the only reason he didn't charge Trump with obstruction is because of a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel policy that a sitting president can't be indicted.

But then Mueller came back from a break in the hearing to issue a "correction." It was not true that he had concluded there'd been obstruction but was blocked by the OLC policy, he said. In fact he never concluded that there had been obstruction at all. "We didn't make a decision about culpability," Mueller said. "We didn't go down that road."

Instead of leaving it at that, Mueller said in his report and testimony that Trump was not "exonerated" of an obstruction charge. That led to blaring headlines Wednesday morning while the hearing was still going on. "Trump was not exonerated by my report, Robert Mueller tells Congress," said the BBC. "Mueller Report Did Not Exonerate Trump, Mueller Says," blared the HuffPost .

But in what may have been the most embarrassing moment for Mueller, Republican Congressman Michael Turner (R-OH) pointed out that a prosecutor does not have the power to exonerate anyone. A prosecutor prosecutes.

Rep. Michael Turner

"Mr. Mueller, does the Attorney General have the power or authority to exonerate?" Turner asked the witness. "What I'm putting up here is the United States code. This is where the Attorney General gets his power. And the constitution .

"Mr. Mueller, nowhere in these [documents] is there a process or description on 'exonerate.' There's no office of exoneration at the Attorney General's office. Mr. Mueller, would you agree with me that the Attorney General does not have the power to exonerate?"

"I'm going to pass on that," Mueller replied.

"Why?" Turner asked.

"Because it embroils us in a legal discussion, and I'm not prepared to do a legal discussion in that arena," Mueller said.

Pointing to a CNN headline that had just appeared, "MUELLER: TRUMP WAS NOT EXONERATED," Turner said: "What you know is, that this can't say, 'Mueller exonerated Trump,' because you don't have the power or authority to exonerate Trump. You have no more power to declare him exonerated than you have the power to declare him Anderson Cooper."

Turner said: "The statement about exoneration is misleading, and it's meaningless. It colors this investigation -- one word of out the entire portion of your report. And it's a meaningless word that has no legal meaning, and it has colored your entire report."

Who is a Spy for Whom?

Mueller also took a pass every time the Steele dossier was raised, which it first was by Rep. David Nunes (R-CA):

"Despite acknowledging dossier allegations as being salacious and unverified, former FBI Director James Comey briefed those allegations to President Obama and President-elect Trump. Those briefings conveniently leaked to the press, resulting in the publication of the dossier and launching thousands of false press stories based on the word of a foreign ex-spy, one who admitted he was desperate that Trump lose the election and who was eventually fired as an FBI source for leaking to the press.

"And the entire investigation was open based not on Five Eyes intelligence, but on a tip from a foreign politician about a conversation involving Joseph Mifsud. He's a Maltese diplomat who's widely portrayed as a Russian agent, but seems to have for more connections with Western governments, including our own FBI and our own State Department, than with Russia."

Mueller admitted that though Mifsud lied to the FBI he never charged him as he had others. When Nunes pointed out to Mueller that Konstantin Kilimnik, a Manafort business associate, whom Mueller's report identifies as having ties to Russian intelligence, was actually a U.S. State Department asset , Mueller refused to comment saying he was "loath" to get into it.

This Schiff Has Sailed

The chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff (D-CA) used the word "lies" 19 times in his opening statement, which contained at least that many.

The central one was this:

"Your investigation determined that the Trump campaign, including Donald Trump himself, knew that a foreign power was intervening in our election and welcomed it, built Russian meddling into their strategy and used it.

Disloyalty to country. Those are strong words, but how else are we to describe a presidential campaign which did not inform the authorities of a foreign offer of dirt on their opponent, which did not publicly shun it or turn it away, but which instead invited it, encouraged it and made full use of it?"

Schiff reluctantly admitted that no Trump conspiracy with Russia was uncovered, but said the "crime" of disloyalty was even worse.

"Disloyalty to country violates the very oath of citizenship, our devotion to a core principle on which our nation was founded that we, the people and not some foreign power that wishes us ill, we decide who governs us," said Schiff. It was pure fantasy.

Mueller should have taken a pass on that one too.

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former correspondent for T he Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe , Sunday Times of London and numerous other newspapers. He can be reached at joelauria@consortiumnews.com and followed on Twitter @unjoe .


Zhu , July 26, 2019 at 21:43

Cratulus, it's Deep State faction vs Deep State faction. Why? Power, moner, sex, like Genghis Khan's wars.

Zhu , July 26, 2019 at 21:36

Russiagate relies on deep delusion and deep irrational prejudices. It's perhaps comparable to the Dreyfus Affair.

Brad Smith , July 26, 2019 at 14:42

"Exoneration Law and Legal Definition. Exoneration refers to a court order that discharges a person from liability. In criminal context the term exonerate refers to a state where a person convicted of a crime is later proved to be innocent. The term exoneration is also referred in the context of surety bail bonds."

Exoneration Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

You must first be convicted, then you may be exonerated. Conversely there is no need to be exonerated from a non-conviction. A non-conviction is simply "The state of innocence" which is what everyone is always assumed to be in.

You literally can not be exonerated in any legal sense of the term, until after you have been convicted. That is simply a fact. It is 100% impossible to legally exonerate anyone until after they have been convicted.

(Don't any of these talking heads on TV or congress own a legal dictionary?)

Trump who is not a lawyer used the term in it's colloquial form. ie; I was exonerated in the eyes of the public. Mueller and everyone else is conflating the colloquial with the legal and you can't tell me that this is done on accident or out of ignorance of the law.

There is in fact a legal definition for Exoneration and even a process by which it takes place, so why doesn't anyone actually use the legal definition or talk about what actually takes place when an exoneration happens? If they did it would certainly clear up any misunderstanding rather quickly, right?

Sadly, the answer is simple; they choose to obfuscate instead of clearing this up. Conflating the legal with the colloquial allows them to keep many aspects of this hoax alive or at least to cover up what a complete failure it was. It keeps a cloud over Trump as well, etc. etc. so there is plenty of motive to keep people confused about this issue.

So one more time; A legal exoneration is what happens when exculpatory evidence leads to the overturning of a conviction. There is no such thing as a legal exoneration in any criminal proceeding in America that takes place before a conviction.

It is in fact a legal impossibility for Mueller to exonerate Trump and Mueller could have cleared this up by simply reading from any Law Dictionary.

Cratylus , July 26, 2019 at 13:42

P.S. Now that the dust has settled, one must ask why the Deep State wanted Trump gone. Why does the Establishment hate him so much? Certainly it is partly a question of "style" or proper upper middle class behavior. But Bush II was also "guilty" of that and did not inspire nearly the intensity of blind hatred that has targeted Trump from on high.

Trump committed an unforgivable sin in suggesting we "get along with Russia." That was to be the beginning of a different foreign policy. Those who cannot genuinely admit this that Trump was heading the US in a better direction at least in this one area are also extremely afflicted by TDS. And I notice that the malady continues to afflict many of those who have integrity to see through Russiagate. It is time to wake up to this fact and make the measure of Trump his actions which are different in different areas.

emma peele , July 26, 2019 at 15:19

Trump wanted out of wars and to work with Russia ..cant have that.

Woodwards book proved that the deepstate neocon were working against Trump and even bragged to the media how they stole papers off his desk

Could Trump Take Down the American Empire?

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/could-trump-take-down-the-american-empire/

Cratylus , July 26, 2019 at 13:32

Mueller did seem to be senile which leads one to the conclusion that he could not have been genuinely in charge of the investigation. So the Hillaryite lawyers surrounding him must have been manipulating him, or "operating" him to use an FBI term.
But if one wished to ascribe extreme deviousness to Mueller and company, perhaps he was feigning senility to get off the hook when and if Barr uncovers the entire plot, for conspiracy there surely was given the giant two+ year fizzle this has turned out to be.
Either way Barr has a big job on his hands.

Truth , July 26, 2019 at 12:10

Mueller the deep stater, as Clinton Kerry Obama Comey Rosenstein Podesta Schumer Pelosi Feinstein, Romney, Dole, bush, families and all the rest since 1904 Rockefeller Plan for America was published, as prequel to Rhodes "new world order" 1898, are being revealed in the same media that they have used since American communist party creation of Hollywood. Of course it was only done during lowest viewing time of the month to minimize the majority of those who still stupidly watch tv and then vote based on it.

Mueller knows he as a supposed attorney officer of the court was completely unprofessional in his words actions and mostly inactions towards obvious fraud and conspiracy of MI5 and the entire DNC. Which makes him an accessory during the facts. His statements against the unexplained "TRUMP CAMPAIGN" had no legal basis . Were only trigger words for the intentionally ignorant TV viewers.

Brian Murphy , July 25, 2019 at 15:10

I think it is a profound error to view Russiagate as Democrats v. Republicans. It is Washington insiders versus outsiders, establishment versus non-establishment, Washington bureaucracy against the rest of the country, Deep State versus the will of the voters. The same kind of sham investigation would be occurring if it had been outsider Sanders winning in 2016 as opposed to outsider Trump.

Linda Doucett , July 25, 2019 at 11:17

Yes, we can all agree that Trump is not fit. That fact does not legitimize the other actors in this farce. The destruction of the Republic began a long time ago and will not end until the global playing field has been leveled. As for who put Trump in office? only the purposely obtuse believe it eas Russia. Every move Trump has made in office has been to appease his Zionist masters.

Sam F , July 25, 2019 at 20:42

There is an interesting lead, that the Republic cannot be restored "until the global playing field has been leveled." Curious what modes or means of leveling you may have considered?

Paul Merrell , July 26, 2019 at 19:17

@ "As for who put Trump in office? only the purposely obtuse believe it eas Russia."

Yes. As Jay Leno said, "if God had wanted us to vote He would have sent us candidates."

In my opinion, it's the folks who installed Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate who put Trump in office.

Drew Hunkins , July 25, 2019 at 11:16

Nadler's an embarrassment.
Brennan's an embarrassment.
Schiff's an embarrassment.

emma peele , July 25, 2019 at 15:10

Brennan is a criminal .who lied and tortured and mass murdered people

JDD , July 25, 2019 at 10:40

The bumbling, stumbling testimony by a supposedly top prosecutor was an embarrassment to any unbiased observor. The fact that Mueller was ignorant of the basic facts of his own report, even stating that he was unfamiliar with Fusion GPS, makes clear that the investigation and report bearing his name was actualy the work product of the Trump-hating fanatics of his handpicked legal team, led by Andrew Weissman. That the investigation and its product was never anything but a witch hunt, as the president has stated, was clear from the series of lies, ommissions and frameups which characterized the entire investition, which Mueller could not substantiate or even simply articulate. However, the irreparable damage done to the president's promise of cooperation with Russia was in no small part due to the cowardice showed by Republican acceptance of the big lie of "sweeping and systematic Russian interference" on which they doubled down in yesterday's drama. The actual collusion, which was between British intelligence and the Clinton Campaign/ Obama administration, to frame Trump as a Russian agent-of-influence and to overturn the results of the 2016 election, was not exposed and the opportunity missed to to further the process of dismantling that treasonous apparatus, often erroneously referred to as "the deep state."

LJ , July 25, 2019 at 10:38

Quite a few people couldn't help but notice that the country was shifting into a dis-informational mode several years ago. So much for the Information Age, the Internet and hand held ( communication ) devices to increase awareness. It was noticed by some folks even here at CN that tendencies had come ito play that were reminiscent of Orwell's dystopian yet fictional accounts in the novel 1984. This entire Russiagate episode could just as easily have come from 1984's Ministry of Information as our own Intelligence Services and might have been just as boring if it had . Meanwhile us , prols, just go with the flow and don't really care. Are things that much different than they have ever been? I rem,ember the Waterdate hearings and the Iran-Contra Hearings, Ken Starr's Investigation. I'm a little to young to remember the Warren Commission or Senator Joe McCarthy and the Red Scare but I do remember the 9/11 Commission and WMGs in Iraq.. I remember wrote a paper on Propaganda films in WW II. Is this episode really all that different?

Eric32 , July 25, 2019 at 10:38

The Russia interference hoax has been extremely successful.

It has dangerously damaged US-Russian relations, and it has done the same to internal American politics.

But it has successfully diverted attention and investigation of Hillary Clinton's incompetence and corruption.

There's a pool of international and domestic corruption involving the phony Clinton foundation, paid "speeches", "contributions", money flowing to the Clintons that took them from being deep in debt, to having a net worth of a couple hundred million dollars.

I think there is so much networked crime and mutual blackmail in the US government that nothing will ever be done about this .

[Jul 29, 2019] What Mueller Was Trying to Hide by Kimberley A. Strassel

Highly recommended!
Yes Mueller was in protection racket business...
Notable quotes:
"... His investigation was about protecting the actual miscreants in the collusion hoax. ..."
"... It's now clear it was equally about protecting the actual miscreants behind the Russia-collusion hoax. ..."
"... The most notable aspect of the Mueller report was always what it omitted: the origins of this mess. Christopher Steele's dossier was central to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's probe, the basis of many of the claims of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. Yet the Mueller authors studiously wrote around the dossier, mentioning it only in perfunctory terms. ..."
"... The report ignored Mr. Steele's paymaster, Fusion GPS, and its own ties to Russians. It also ignored Fusion's paymaster, the Clinton campaign, and the ugly politics behind the dossier hit job ..."
"... Mr. Mueller's testimony this week put to rest any doubt that this sheltering was deliberate. ..."
"... Mr. Mueller claimed he couldn't answer questions about the dossier because it "predated" his tenure and is the subject of a Justice Department investigation. These excuses are disingenuous. Nearly everything Mr. Mueller investigated predated his tenure, and there's no reason the Justice Department probe bars Mr. Mueller from providing a straightforward, factual account of his team's handling of the dossier. ..."
"... If anything, Mr. Mueller had an obligation to answer those questions, since they go to the central failing of his own probe. As Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz asked Mr. Mueller, how could a special-counsel investigation into "Russia's interference" have any credibility if it failed to look into whether the Steele dossier was itself disinformation from Moscow? ..."
"... Mr. Gaetz asked: "Did Russians really tell that to Christopher Steele, or did he just make it up and was he lying to the FBI?" ..."
"... Republicans asked basic questions about the report's conclusions or analysis, and Mr. Mueller dodged and weaved and refused to avoid answering questions about the FBI's legwork, the dossier's role and Fusion's involvement. ..."
"... California Rep. Devin Nunes asked several questions about one of the men at the epicenter of the "collusion" conspiracy -- academic Joseph Mifsud, whom former FBI Director Jim Comey has tried to paint as a Russian agent. Mr. Mueller: "I am not going to speak to the series of happenings as you articulated them." ..."
"... The Mueller team, rather than question the FBI's actions, went out of its way to build on them. That's how we ended up with tortured plea agreements for process crimes from figures like former Trump aide George Papadopoulos and former national security adviser Michael Flynn. They were peripheral figures in an overhyped drama, who nonetheless had to be scalped to legitimize the early actions of Mr. Comey & Co. Mr. Mueller inherited the taint, and his own efforts were further tarnished. That accounts for Mr. Mueller's stonewalling. ..."
"... That's been the story all along. Mr. Comey hid his actions from Congress; the Justice Department and FBI worked overtime to obstruct Republican-led congressional probes; and Mr. Mueller and his team are clearly playing their own important role in hiding the truth. The Mueller testimony only highlights how important it is that Attorney General William Barr is finally pursuing accountability. ..."
Jul 26, 2019 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

His investigation was about protecting the actual miscreants in the collusion hoax.

Special counsel Robert Mueller testified before two House committees Wednesday, and his performance requires us to look at his investigation and report in a new light. We've been told it was solely about Russian electoral interference and obstruction of justice. It's now clear it was equally about protecting the actual miscreants behind the Russia-collusion hoax.

The most notable aspect of the Mueller report was always what it omitted: the origins of this mess. Christopher Steele's dossier was central to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's probe, the basis of many of the claims of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. Yet the Mueller authors studiously wrote around the dossier, mentioning it only in perfunctory terms.

The report ignored Mr. Steele's paymaster, Fusion GPS, and its own ties to Russians. It also ignored Fusion's paymaster, the Clinton campaign, and the ugly politics behind the dossier hit job.

Mr. Mueller's testimony this week put to rest any doubt that this sheltering was deliberate. In his opening statement he declared that he would not "address questions about the opening of the FBI's Russia investigation, which occurred months before my appointment, or matters related to the so-called Steele Dossier." The purpose of those omissions was obvious, as those two areas go to the heart of why the nation has been forced to endure years of collusion fantasy.

Mr. Mueller claimed he couldn't answer questions about the dossier because it "predated" his tenure and is the subject of a Justice Department investigation. These excuses are disingenuous. Nearly everything Mr. Mueller investigated predated his tenure, and there's no reason the Justice Department probe bars Mr. Mueller from providing a straightforward, factual account of his team's handling of the dossier.

If anything, Mr. Mueller had an obligation to answer those questions, since they go to the central failing of his own probe. As Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz asked Mr. Mueller, how could a special-counsel investigation into "Russia's interference" have any credibility if it failed to look into whether the Steele dossier was itself disinformation from Moscow? Mr. Steele acknowledges that senior Russian officials were the source of his dossier's claims of an "extensive conspiracy." Given that no such conspiracy actually existed, Mr. Gaetz asked: "Did Russians really tell that to Christopher Steele, or did he just make it up and was he lying to the FBI?"

Mr. Mueller surreally responded: "As I said earlier, with regard to Steele, that is beyond my purview."

So it went throughout the whole long day. Republicans asked basic questions about the report's conclusions or analysis, and Mr. Mueller dodged and weaved and refused to avoid answering questions about the FBI's legwork, the dossier's role and Fusion's involvement. Ohio Rep. Steve Chabot asked how the report could have neglected to mention Fusion's ties to a Russian company and lawyer. Mr. Mueller: "Outside my purview." California Rep. Devin Nunes asked several questions about one of the men at the epicenter of the "collusion" conspiracy -- academic Joseph Mifsud, whom former FBI Director Jim Comey has tried to paint as a Russian agent. Mr. Mueller: "I am not going to speak to the series of happenings as you articulated them."

Then again, how could he? The Mueller team, rather than question the FBI's actions, went out of its way to build on them. That's how we ended up with tortured plea agreements for process crimes from figures like former Trump aide George Papadopoulos and former national security adviser Michael Flynn. They were peripheral figures in an overhyped drama, who nonetheless had to be scalped to legitimize the early actions of Mr. Comey & Co. Mr. Mueller inherited the taint, and his own efforts were further tarnished. That accounts for Mr. Mueller's stonewalling.

The special counsel's often befuddled testimony has predictably raised questions about how in control he was of the 22-month investigation or the writing of the report. Yet in some ways it matters little whether it was Mr. Mueller calling the shots, or "pit bull" Andrew Weissmann, or Mr. Mueller's congressional minder, Aaron Zebley. All three spent years in the Justice Department-FBI hierarchy, as did many of the other prosecutors and agents on the probe. That institutional crew early on made the calculated decision to shelter the FBI, the Justice Department, outside private actors, and leading Democrats from any scrutiny of their own potential involvement with 2016 Russian election interference.

That's been the story all along. Mr. Comey hid his actions from Congress; the Justice Department and FBI worked overtime to obstruct Republican-led congressional probes; and Mr. Mueller and his team are clearly playing their own important role in hiding the truth. The Mueller testimony only highlights how important it is that Attorney General William Barr is finally pursuing accountability.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

Copyright ©2019 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Appeared in the July 26, 2019, print edition.

This article was originally published by " WSJ "

[Jul 28, 2019] Mueller Crumbles Under Questioning by Barbara Boland

Highly recommended!
On one hand Mueller supported and promoted the witch hunt which is the Russiagate. On the other water suddenly became a little bit hot for him and his henchmen as there is a slight chance that Barr is not joking.
Mueller is the first prosecutor in the history of Justice Department who claimed that he does not exonerate the falsely accused of Russian connections President. Which is 100% pure McCartuism-style witch hunt. Of course as he supported Iraw WDM and presided over Anthrax investigation (or cover up to be more correct) this is easy for him to be legal innovator in this area.
Notable quotes:
"... the report was clear that members of Trump's team had been encouraged to lie to investigators, and this had been widely reported throughout the media and in several books. ..."
"... On many important questions, Mueller stated that he could not comment because those matters were under investigation by other departments, or they were not "in my purview." That was his response to questions about the Steele report and the FISA warrant used to spy on the Trump campaign, which are under investigation by the Department of Justice. But he also responded this way to questions on the Russia investigation. How can the special prosecutor charged with investigating whether Russia interfered with our elections decline comment on the topic? ..."
"... Well that proves it, I guess. After all, did Mueller testify to Congress as to the extent of Iraq's much-vaunted WMD program, and lo! there it was(n't)! ..."
"... Or for that matter, Mueller claimed that Concord Management had ties to the Russian government. Turns out that he had no evidence for his claim. ..."
"... Mueller is the god that failed. The Democrats considered him their savior. It was "wait til the Mueller report". "Soon it will be Mueller time". "Just wait on Mueller, you'll see." ..."
"... Then, in the Mueller hearing they quoted scripture from the book of Mueller, asking their savior to provide more divine wisdom on the scripture. But he was no god. He was a human whose mental faculties had declined due to the aging process all of us mortals must endure. And it became abundantly clear that he had been just a figurehead in a witch hunt by radical major Democratic party donor prosecutors. Mueller was shamelessly used by morally bankrupt Democrat apparatchiks. ..."
"... To all the Mueller supporters, he couldn't even answer simple questions like "when did you and your team conclude there was no collusion/conspiracy with Russia?" ..."
"... That question 1) fell under his purview, 2) arose from the four corners of his report, 3) not in anyway prohibited by the DoJ directive and 4) not about something that would be easy to forget. ..."
"... Yet he refused to answer. Some stand up guy he is. ..."
Jul 28, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

That answer appears to directly contradict page 180 of the report which states, "As defined in legal dictionaries, collusion is largely synonymous with conspiracy as that crime is set forth in the general federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. 371," Collins pointed out.

"Are you sitting here today testifying something different than what your report states?"

Mueller stuttered and appeared confused, flipped to the relevant page of the report, and said that he would defer to the report.

Throughout the hearing, Democratic members would read the definition of corruption or obstruction and then try to get Mueller to explain how various actions did not qualify or why the report did not reach a finding. Each time, Mueller declined to comment.

To say that watching his testimony was painful is an understatement.

In an exchange with Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-Pa.) that exemplifies the entire hearing, the Pennsylvania Republican asked, "You made a decision not to prosecute, right?"

"No, we made a decision not to decide whether to prosecute or not."

In the afternoon intelligence committee hearing, Rep. John Ratcliffe asked Mueller to clear up confusion regarding his morning testimony, where he appeared to contradict the report on the question of whether he had whiffed on an indictment because the Office of Legal Counsel said it was not possible to indict a sitting president.

"What I wanted to say [in the morning] is that we did not make any determination with regard to culpability, in any way. We did not start that process, down the road," said Mueller.

But in his morning testimony before the House Judiciary committee, he said: "The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed."

See if you can make sense of this exchange:

Democratic Rep. Andre Carson: "Would you agree that these acts demonstrated a betrayal of the democratic values our country rests on?"

Mueller: "I can't agree with that. Not that it's not true, but I cannot agree with it."

This was typical of Mueller's bizarre testimony throughout the day.

Democrats used the hearing to read huge portions of the report, as well as Donald Trump's tweets and campaign utterances, as if somehow they were covering new ground. In one such exchange, a member asked: "Trump and his campaign welcomed and encouraged Russian interference?"

Mueller: "Yes."

Question: "And then Trump and his campaign lied about it to cover it up?"

Mueller: "Yes."

Anyone who has followed news coverage of the Mueller report knows that line of questioning is not breaking new ground, as the report was clear that members of Trump's team had been encouraged to lie to investigators, and this had been widely reported throughout the media and in several books.

Even so, Democrats persisted in reading publicly available Trump statements aloud. During his portion of time, Rep. Mike Quigley chose to read Trump's campaign trail statements about Wikileaks .

"I love Wikileaks."

"This Wikileaks is like a treasure trove."
"Boy, I love reading those Wikileaks."

He then asked Mueller to react to Trump's statements. "Problematic is an understatement, in terms of giving some hope or some boost to what is and should be illegal activity," Mueller said. Did we really need Mueller's opinion on Trump's statements uttered on the stump, all of which were made before he was elected president? How is this type of commentary valuable?

On many important questions, Mueller stated that he could not comment because those matters were under investigation by other departments, or they were not "in my purview." That was his response to questions about the Steele report and the FISA warrant used to spy on the Trump campaign, which are under investigation by the Department of Justice. But he also responded this way to questions on the Russia investigation. How can the special prosecutor charged with investigating whether Russia interfered with our elections decline comment on the topic?

Congressional hearings aren't like a court room. There's no judge that can order an uncooperative witness to answer. That's one of the many reasons that highly politicized Congressional hearings often quickly descend into kangaroo-court style bludgeoning of the witness.

Yet today, because the confused witness appeared flummoxed by rapid-fire questions and by the contents of his own report, his evasions and memory lapses instead undermined the credibility of the report itself, and had people questioning whether Mueller had really led the investigation or not.

Barbara Boland is 's foreign policy and national security reporter. Follow her on Twitter @BBatDC.


eddie parolini 3 days ago • edited

In reference to Russia meddling in the 2016 election, he specifically said that Russia had meddled in the past, Russia was meddling as of right now, and Russia would continue to meddle in the future.

I guess that qualifies as having nothing to say about Russia meddling if you want to believe that he had nothing to say about Russia meddling in our elections.

Sid Finster eddie parolini 3 days ago • edited
Well that proves it, I guess. After all, did Mueller testify to Congress as to the extent of Iraq's much-vaunted WMD program, and lo! there it was(n't)!

https://fas.org/irp/congres...

Or for that matter, Mueller claimed that Concord Management had ties to the Russian government. Turns out that he had no evidence for his claim.

https://assets.documentclou...

gdpbull 3 days ago
Mueller is the god that failed. The Democrats considered him their savior. It was "wait til the Mueller report". "Soon it will be Mueller time". "Just wait on Mueller, you'll see."

Then, in the Mueller hearing they quoted scripture from the book of Mueller, asking their savior to provide more divine wisdom on the scripture. But he was no god. He was a human whose mental faculties had declined due to the aging process all of us mortals must endure. And it became abundantly clear that he had been just a figurehead in a witch hunt by radical major Democratic party donor prosecutors. Mueller was shamelessly used by morally bankrupt Democrat apparatchiks.

But they will not stop just because their god failed. They will find another god and keep right on investigating.

MAGA_Ken 2 days ago
To all the Mueller supporters, he couldn't even answer simple questions like "when did you and your team conclude there was no collusion/conspiracy with Russia?"

That question 1) fell under his purview, 2) arose from the four corners of his report, 3) not in anyway prohibited by the DoJ directive and 4) not about something that would be easy to forget.

Yet he refused to answer. Some stand up guy he is.

[Jul 28, 2019] Dementia or very skillful, convincing acting: Mueller would have looked a lot better if he had only taken the time to read... the Mueller report.

Mueller came across as an old man.... muddling.... confused.... He was out of his depth. One would have to conclude that he is not remotely credible based on his inability to answer questions and apparent ignorance of a report he is supposed to have authored. Embarrassingly inept!
Jul 28, 2019 | www.youtube.com


Hangfire-13 , 2 days ago

Mueller would have looked a lot better if he had only taken the time to read... the Mueller report.

William Jones , 2 days ago

Better to be thought a fool than recognized as an accomplice.

Solgato Blogopogo , 1 day ago

Mueller sold America on the existence of WMDs in Iraq too.

BigWater59 , 1 day ago

This was a dog and pony show with the main act being a dementia patient in poor health. SAD

Steven Trekking , 2 days ago

FFS, I live in the UK and even I have heard the link between Fusion GPS and the dodgy dossier. Has Mueller been working alone in a cave or something? Has he tried Wikipedia?

Ivana Seymore , 2 days ago

I think we should bring Mueller to the stand as a witness for his investigation of nineleven...

George Christiansen , 2 days ago div tabindex="0" role="artic

le"> The had the lesson taught to them, but I seriously doubt that they learned anything. I also think that Mueller was largely playing dumb. His job is to continue to raise doubt, not to bring clarity. He is till doing a great job in that regards. I hope it leads to jail time.

Ron Preece , 3 days ago

$30,000,000 down the toilet. Mueller deserves the Roger Stone Treatment !

Amani jm , 3 days ago

div> Collussion and Obstruction are synonymus? Muller: NO But Your report said so. Muller: I stick with the report. Hahahahaah

Steve Lee , 2 days ago

In all honesty either Muller was lying, unbelievably incompetent or genuinely has some form of dementia and that is meant in a true honest opinion..

dotatough , 1 day ago

"They do not deserve to rule, that much is clear." Love ya Tucc

Eric Sanders , 3 days ago

Did anyone ask Mueller if he actually wrote the report?

Elizabeth Maldonado , 2 days ago (edited)

Mueller's playing dum to cover his own hide and the democraps should be ashamed wasting tax payers money & that bringing the only work they done in 2 years corrupt sorry individuals

Bleyluige , 1 day ago

Like someboday said, the person who learned most about the Mueller report during the hearing was Robert Mueller!

balsawerkz , 2 days ago

When are leaders going to call out Adam Schiff on his extremely obvious cocaine eyes?

Carlos Matos , 1 day ago (edited)

Tucker spitting some hard truth there at 7:30

Edmund007013 , 1 day ago

Mueller obviously has deep dementia and should be in a nursing home. Great Summary Tucker ! Well done !

Chris Wriight , 1 day ago

"Daft old man blinking in the sunlight after his curtain was torn away" hit the nail on the head😂

Ken H , 3 days ago

Recall Nadler and Schiff. Those stuffed, spineless suits.

Joel Martin , 1 day ago

So basically the whole "Russia" investigation was complete sham!

Tad Ulrich , 14 hours ago

Well worth watching this just for Tucker's superb commentary alone! With this Mueller fiasco, a stake has been driven deep into the Deep State's heart.

Jennie Gall , 2 days ago

OR it's a BRILLIANT RUSE in this Political Theater. He was ACTING. This isn't the real Robert Mueller.

Robert Boothby , 3 days ago

Tucker, that was another fine job. "The ruling class did this to us". Well said and spot on! Keep it up for as long as they allow it. Thank you.

[Jul 28, 2019] "A ruling class did that...they do not deserve to rule." Amen Tucker.

A great quote Tucker! "A daft old man blinking in the sunlight once the curtain was removed" Awesome!!!
This jerk is not familiar with Fusion GPS? After 3 years of taxpayer money spend down the drain on him and his frauds
Notable quotes:
"... Schiff Sandwiches and Nothing Burgers with a side order of Nadler Fries, served up by a senile old bureaucrat. ..."
"... Just think how Democrats must be feeling after building him up for three years as Captain America ..."
"... We learned Mueller never interviewed anyone or wrote his report. Who did? And what did he do for 2 1/2 years besides drink? ..."
Jul 28, 2019 | www.youtube.com

Theodore Bradley , 3 days ago

"For the record your name is Robert Mueller?" "I won't go into that"

Andy /// , 2 days ago

Muller is either an Oscar winning actor trying to avoid Self Incrimination or he is Senile.

RageDaug , 2 days ago

I wish conservatives would stop understating Fusion GPS. "Fusion GPS is the arm of the Clinton Campaign that colluded with a foreign agent, Christopher Steele, to work with Russians to obtain opposition research against Trump"

Bradly May , 2 days ago

I think Mueller was laying the groundwork for his upcoming trial. His lawyers will use a defense claiming he's old possible dementia or alzheimer's disease.

M Peezy , 3 days ago

Robert " I have no idea what my own report says " Mueller

Janet Gaurie , 2 days ago

What does it say about Robert Mueller? That he's senile or is obstructing justice.

HORNET1 , 2 days ago

Schiff Sandwiches and Nothing Burgers with a side order of Nadler Fries, served up by a senile old bureaucrat.

Cuba Blue , 2 days ago

Republicans have known for a long time that Mueller was not competent and even they were shocked at this hearing. Just think how Democrats must be feeling after building him up for three years as Captain America....LMFAO!

joanna freedom , 2 days ago (edited)

We learned Mueller never interviewed anyone or wrote his report. Who did? And what did he do for 2 1/2 years besides drink? Also Volume 2 is all speculation of " sources" aka MSM propaganda. A FAKE report of a FAKE investigation based on a FAKE dossier! 3 years of FAKE NEWS ON A FAKE CLAIM!!!

mike lee , 2 days ago

Robert Mueller wasn't in charge of his own investigation. He was told who to hire and then did zero work. He was a figure head. Someone to give credibility to an attempted coup.

seadooman o , 1 day ago (edited)

Fusion gps hes not filmilar??? he signed the Fisa warrant 3x .

karltbui , 2 days ago (edited)

"A ruling class did that...they do not deserve to rule." Amen Tucker.

Bloom Berg, 2 days ago

Republicans: 1+1 = 2. Is that right, sir ??
Mueller: Can you repeat that Question again.

[Jul 28, 2019] Mueller seemed to be not aware of many details of the investigation done under his name

But who was? Weismann? Zebley? Brennan?
Jul 28, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
paul , Jul 24 2019 18:32 utc | 4
Mueller seemed to be not aware of many details of the investigation done under his name.

He said he knew nothing about GPS, the company hired by the Clinton campaign to contract with MI6 agent Christopher Steele to fabricate the 'dirty dossier'. There were lots of reports about GPS in the media and Mueller missed all of them?

He refused to answer why he did not indict Joseph Mifsud, a mysterious Maltese professor who planted the claim that 'Russia has dirt on Hillary Clinton' with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos later repeated that claim. The FBI then used that fact as the reason to launch its investigation against the Trump campaign. In his report Mueller claimed, without showing evidence, that Mifsud worked for Russia. That is unlikely and there is actual evidence that he worked with the British MI6.

Mifsud lied to the Mueller investigation. But unlike others witnesses who lied, Mueller never indicted him for making false statements. He punted on questions about this issue with multiple "Can't get into that."

He reacted similar when he was asked about Christopher Steele, the British agent who created and peddled the fake 'dirty dossier'.

There is still another Justice Department investigation ongoing that will look at the whole Russia affair from a different viewpoint. Was the FBI investigation into 'Russiagate' an illegal partisan effort to go after Trump? Who really initiate the whole 'Russiagate' campaign that seems to have been run by the British MI6? Was it John Brennan, Obama's CIA director, involved?

Little is known about that second investigation. It will hopefully come up with better evidence and results than the one Robert Mueller led. the most lasting impact of Russiagate will be on free speech

bjd , Jul 24 2019 18:53 utc | 8

Brennan no matter how you toss, turn, stretch, fold or slant it.
Brennan (and a small côterie around him) tried a 'lever-grab' when Trump won.
It got out of hand when the MSM ran away with it and Brennan was ex.
The only way to control this narrative was for Brennan remain in charge of it.
Hence his pundit role on CIA Network News.
It ain't rocket science.

[Jul 28, 2019] After Mueller Debacle, Where Do Democrats Go

Jul 28, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Democrats are in a hellish bind.

Should they proceed with hearings on impeachment, they will divide their party, force their presidential candidates to cease talking health care and start talking impeachment, and probably fail.

Impeachment hearings would fire up the Republican base and energize the GOP minority to prepare for combat in a Judiciary Committee where they are already celebrating having eviscerated the prosecution's star witness.

If Democrats vote impeachment in committee, they will have to take it to the House floor, where their moderates, who won in swing districts, will be forced to vote on it, splitting their own bases in the run-up to the 2020 election.

If Democrats lose the impeachment vote on the House floor, it would be a huge setback. But if they vote impeachment in the House, the trial takes place in a Senate run by Mitch McConnell.

Trump would go into the 2020 battle against a Democratic Party that failed to overthrow the president in a radical coup that it attempted because it was afraid to fight it out with the president in a free and fair election.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.

stevek9 2 hours ago

Republicans raised questions about the origins of the investigation, tracing it back to early 2016 when Maltese intelligence agent Joseph Mifsud leaked to a staffer of the Trump campaign, George Papadopoulos, that Russia had Clinton's emails. That and subsequent meetings have all the marks of an intel agency set-up.

That 'intel agency' ... is the CIA.

Repeatedly, Republicans brought up the dossier written by British spy Christopher Steele, who fed Russian-sourced disinformation to Clinton campaign-financed intel firm, Fusion GPS, who passed it on to the FBI, which used it as evidence to justify warrants to spy on Trump's campaign.

Why introduce 'Russians' ... you said yourself, 'British' Spy. I'd be looking at MI6.

If you read Papadopolous' book or better watch his long 2-part interview with Mark Steyn, you will also learn the names Stefan Halper (CIA) and Alex Downer (Australia).

The dangerous part of 'Russiagate' is that it did not involve Russia at all. It was a plot to influence the election (and later try to overturn it), by elements of the previous US 'regime' in the CIA and FBI.

Whether you hate Trump or not, allowing this to go unpunished means we might as well give up the last vestige of hope that we have a democracy at all.

[Jul 27, 2019] Mueller Magoo by W. James Antle III

Notable quotes:
"... He demonstrated a thin grasp of his own report's findings, even as he implored lawmakers in both parties to read it. He asked members of Congress to repeat their questions 48 times . ..."
"... That's not to say Mueller did nothing for Democrats. He said President Trump was not "exculpated" by his report. He raised the specter of falsified documents and all but said that he punted on obstruction of justice only because a sitting president cannot be indicted under existing Justice Department guidelines. He gamely testified his investigation was no "witch hunt." And some of his seeming confusion was likely strategic: he was trying to avoid giving partisans easy footage confirming their talking points. ..."
"... While Democrats have not totally given up on "collusion," moving the goalposts away from Hillary Clinton's detailed explanation of how the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to fix the election toward vaguer references to "contacts" and "foreign help," obstruction of justice was the name of the game. Mueller acknowledged that there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone in the Trump campaign with collusion-related crimes, even if he stopped short of calling that an exoneration of the president. Paul Manafort, George Papadopolous, Carter Page, Roger Stone -- these were not criminal masterminds. In fact, they were all incredibly sloppy. If they had colluded, they all could easily have been charged. ..."
"... No one who could be indicted was charged with aiding the president in obstructing the investigation either. ..."
"... The real answer Mueller declined to give appears to be that his obstruction allegations would have hinged heavily on Trump's use presidential powers under Article II of the Constitution. The Justice Department under Barr's leadership does not believe this amounted to obstruction in theory or practice. Thus the self-evidently never-fired Mueller was reduced to dropping breadcrumbs and hoping congressional Democrats would find them. ..."
"... Mueller's seeming lack of familiarity with his own investigation lessened the GOP's problem because it helps shift the focus to the "angry Democrats" in the special counsel's office -- people like Andrew Weissman, who attended Hillary's election night party -- rather than Mueller himself. The Democrats are still at square one, trying to dial back Manchurian candidate expectations among the base and shift the impeachment rationale to Trump's passive willingness to benefit from Russian interference without expressing a modicum of outrage. ..."
"... With 95 Democrats willing to impeach Trump over mean tweets, anything is possible. But it's going to take a lot more than Mueller to move House Speaker Nancy Pelosi into that camp. ..."
"... The Steele dossier, whether a truthful compilation or a complete fabrication, is itself an attempt by foreign spies to influence our election. "Collusion" staring us in the face right here. ..."
"... The public spectacle was heart-breaking. It was obvious that Mueller had lost some mental faculties. Surely his special investigative team had to know that, having worked with him for 2+ years, and so the Democrat leadership had to know that as well. And yet they insisted he testify, even though he basically begged to not testify and let him just go off into the twilight of retirement. But no, they threatened to subpoena him. ..."
"... Actually, Trump committed a lot of unforced errors, as well as being generally lazy, stupid and unprepared. ..."
"... With this in mind, to believe the RussiaGate conspiracy theories, one must simultaneously believe that the Russians have abilities that border on psychic mind control superpowers, but at the same time, these same evil geniuses cannot be bothered to plan what to do if their nefarious schemes actually worked out. ..."
"... One can easily accept that Trump is a roaring moron, but one also has to believe that his alleged puppetmaster cannot take the time to consult an attorney or a peruse a copy of the United States Code, available for free on the internet to anyone who bothers to take a peek. And that's just the legal requirements. I won't even go into the clownshow that was Trump's appointments and staffing. ..."
"... The testimony was a complete success because it maintained the status quo. Trump is not going anywhere, both Democrats and Republicans agreed that Russia tampered with the election rendering even more sanctions and increasing cold war tensions, and the only ones indicted were accused of process crimes. Meanwhile, the business of Goldman Sachs gets done in the halls of power. ..."
"... Robert "Saddam has WMD of Mass Destruction" Mueller has been the bag man for the establishment for a long time. Even his dotage, he still managed to perform his job flawlessly. ..."
"... 12 indictments against often former employees of a Russian clickbait farm for spectacularly laughable memes that will never amount to anything because there will never be a trial. One of the parties showed up in court and demanded actual evidence as part of discovery, causing Mueller to desperately ask for a continuance. The judge called Mueller out by denying it. The judge also called Mueller out by showing that he had no evidence that the defendant at issue had any ties tot he Russian government. ..."
"... A paltry $150k was spent for online ads over two years, by Russians, they tell you. They also tell you that about half those ads didn't run until after the election was over and that most of the ads didn't endorse a specific candidate or policy. Yet, you insist this Russian social media blitz altered the outcome of your election somehow. With well north of $3 billion spent on traditional advertising, leave it to MSM to float a turd of such odious girth. ..."
"... Next, Mueller indicts 13 Russian intelligence journeymen and it will never amount to anything. None of them will ever be extradited. There will never be a trial. Never a legal discovery process. No burden of proof that they actually hacked or colluded. No US intelligence agency has ever examined the servers in question. ..."
"... An impeachment is another word for "indictment", and as the saying goes you can indict a ham sandwich. Or impeach a baloney sandwich. If Trump were to wind up in the dock it would be "anything goes", including subpoenas being issued to Madame Hillary. There won't be any impeachment. Too much of a danger of overflowing sewage. ..."
"... Seth Rich could rise up from the dead and show us all, live on CNN, how he leaked the DNC emails, right after DWS confessed on MSNBC to ordering Seth Rich's murder and HRC admitted under oath that she invented russiagate on a bet with Podesta to see whether people really are that stupid and gullible, and CNN, MSNBC and the entire DNC and their cultists would keep pushing the conspiracy theory, never even missing a beat. ..."
"... I'm glad Mr. Mueller finally admitted publicly that he held the President to an Orwellian standard of "probably guilty, which we can't prove, until proven innocent, which we never do" that no American has ever been held to by law enforcement. ..."
Jul 25, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Intelligence Committee about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election in the Rayburn House Office Building July 24, 2019(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) The late Sen. Arlen Specter ended the drive to impeach Bill Clinton by invoking Scottish law and voting "not proven" in the 42rd president's Senate trial. Democrats hope to begin the drive to impeach Donald Trump with a finding by special counsel Robert Mueller that the worst allegations against the 45th president are not proven.

Even this task was made more difficult by the former FBI director and Trump-Russia investigator's unimpressive public congressional testimony. Mueller had trouble identifying questioners. He demonstrated a thin grasp of his own report's findings, even as he implored lawmakers in both parties to read it. He asked members of Congress to repeat their questions 48 times .

The uber-competent G-man about whom liberals sang Christmas carols was not on display Wednesday. "Mueller Time" gave way to Mr. Magoo.

A cursory glance at Politico 's homepage revealed the damage. "'Euphoria': White House, GOP exult after a flat Mueller performance," blared the top headline. Another reads, "Bob Mueller is struggling." And another: "Impeachment drive slowed by Mueller's troubles." Even the New York Times could only manage: "Mueller sticks to script but shows flashes of indignation."

"This is delicate to say, but Mueller, whom I deeply respect, has not publicly testified before Congress in at least six years," fretted Barack Obama's man David Axelrod. "And he does not appear as sharp as he was then."

That's not to say Mueller did nothing for Democrats. He said President Trump was not "exculpated" by his report. He raised the specter of falsified documents and all but said that he punted on obstruction of justice only because a sitting president cannot be indicted under existing Justice Department guidelines. He gamely testified his investigation was no "witch hunt." And some of his seeming confusion was likely strategic: he was trying to avoid giving partisans easy footage confirming their talking points.

But Democrats wanted much more. Ever since Attorney General William Barr released his summary, they have wanted to challenge his framing of the report. His testimony, like that 448-page document, contained plenty of damning information. The bottom line -- that Mueller could not prove a Trump-Russia conspiracy to swing the 2016 presidential election and lacks a convincing explanation for his obstruction equivocation -- remains unchanged.

While Democrats have not totally given up on "collusion," moving the goalposts away from Hillary Clinton's detailed explanation of how the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to fix the election toward vaguer references to "contacts" and "foreign help," obstruction of justice was the name of the game. Mueller acknowledged that there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone in the Trump campaign with collusion-related crimes, even if he stopped short of calling that an exoneration of the president. Paul Manafort, George Papadopolous, Carter Page, Roger Stone -- these were not criminal masterminds. In fact, they were all incredibly sloppy. If they had colluded, they all could easily have been charged.

If Justice Department regulations on presidential indictments did not prevent a finding of insufficient evidence to charge conspiracy, why did these guidelines require Congress to make the final determination on obstruction? No one who could be indicted was charged with aiding the president in obstructing the investigation either.

The real answer Mueller declined to give appears to be that his obstruction allegations would have hinged heavily on Trump's use presidential powers under Article II of the Constitution. The Justice Department under Barr's leadership does not believe this amounted to obstruction in theory or practice. Thus the self-evidently never-fired Mueller was reduced to dropping breadcrumbs and hoping congressional Democrats would find them.

Both parties entered the hearings with a fundamental problem. For Republicans, how do you discredit Mueller for his negative findings about the president while also affirming his failure to prove an election-related conspiracy as definitive? The Democrats' dilemma was that they knew Trump had behaved badly in response to Russian election interference and the subsequent investigation, but hoped Mueller would discover something worse. When he merely supplied color and a reliable narrator for what we largely already knew, many Democrats wanted to pivot back to impeaching Trump over that unseemly behavior.

Mueller's seeming lack of familiarity with his own investigation lessened the GOP's problem because it helps shift the focus to the "angry Democrats" in the special counsel's office -- people like Andrew Weissman, who attended Hillary's election night party -- rather than Mueller himself. The Democrats are still at square one, trying to dial back Manchurian candidate expectations among the base and shift the impeachment rationale to Trump's passive willingness to benefit from Russian interference without expressing a modicum of outrage.

You can argue that we should expect more from a president than to simply have refrained from directly conspiring with a hostile foreign power to reach the White House. Yet that case becomes harder to make when that is precisely what you have conditioned rank-and-file Democrats to expect from the Mueller report. No dramatic reading of that report, least of all by a 74-year-old clearly no longer accustomed to congressional testimony, will deliver on those expectations.

With 95 Democrats willing to impeach Trump over mean tweets, anything is possible. But it's going to take a lot more than Mueller to move House Speaker Nancy Pelosi into that camp.


stevek9 3 days ago

I would say this is by far the most charitable interpretation of Mueller's testimony I've seen. He didn't want to talk about the 'Steele Dossier' ... the whole basis for the Russiagate farce, and then claimed he didn't know who GPS Fusion was ... the outfit hired by Clinton to write the dossier in the first place. That this whole pile of rubbish was not laughed out of existence is a tribute to the ability of the media (who hated Trump), to convince a large number of people of a preposterous fantasy.

He reminds me a little bit of my dad, and a little bit of Cato the Younger. But to his fellow Republicans--he's Mr. Magoo.

Wilfred 3 days ago
The Steele dossier, whether a truthful compilation or a complete fabrication, is itself an attempt by foreign spies to influence our election. "Collusion" staring us in the face right here.

Why haven't the Democrats been investigated for it?

rick allen Wilfred 2 days ago
Maybe because there's a little difference between hiring a private firm to do opposition research, and Russian military intelligence stealing and releasing tens of thousands of private documents from one political party to help the other win the Presidency?
Fabian Wilfred a day ago
The dossier is not an attempt by foreign spies. It's an attempt by the Democrats to use foreign spies.
WorkingClass 3 days ago
The majority of House Democrats voted against impeachment. I would say this was a good day for Democrats.
KevinS 3 days ago
"You can argue that we should expect more from a president than to simply have refrained from directly conspiring with a hostile foreign power to reach the White House."

Ya think?

tweets21 2 days ago
Even after the spectacle, and the grueling two years of media hype, nothing has moved the dial from those who hate Trump, and those who are Trump supporters. The 2020 election may again come down to the electoral college system. We already know where voters on the upper east coast and California stand. Major populations.
gdpbull 2 days ago
The public spectacle was heart-breaking. It was obvious that Mueller had lost some mental faculties. Surely his special investigative team had to know that, having worked with him for 2+ years, and so the Democrat leadership had to know that as well. And yet they insisted he testify, even though he basically begged to not testify and let him just go off into the twilight of retirement. But no, they threatened to subpoena him.

By all accounts, Mueller had a long a admirable career. Its disgusting that most people's memory of him and his legacy will be of this last public embarrassing spectacle.

The Democratic Party has shown its complete lack of moral compass. When it comes to politics, anything goes, including the destruction of people's lives. They even eat their own when its considered politically expedient. The Anita Hill hearings, Kavannah hearings, me too movement, show me the man and the people around him, we'll find the crimes mentality. What's next? Murder? It would not surprise me in the least.

Its clear now that the entire Russian collusion narrative was a set-up by the Democratic party. It was all about entrapment, perjury traps, and selective media leaking.

Connecticut Farmer gdpbull 2 days ago
The bottom line was, is, and always will be as follows: The Democrat Party expected their candidate to win in a cakewalk over Trump. If she won we wouldn't have heard one word about these Russians (Oh, and by the way, do these "Russians" have names?). It was Clinton's election to lose and she promptly went out and lost it! Period! End of story! In their eyes the candidate of "The Deplorables" won and the Democrats are enraged--so enraged that since Election Day 2016 they have been doing all they can do to delegitimize the election and Trump's status as POTUS. And all the while-- thanks to BOTH parties--the nation's infrastructure steadily crumbles and the immigration crisis remains unresolved (to cite just two examples).
interguru 2 days ago
On impeachment: Just imagine that Barak Obama had illegally spent $120,000 of his campaign cash for hush money to his prostitute. What would happen?
Micha_Elyi interguru 2 days ago • edited
"On impeachment: Just imagine that Barak Obama had illegally spent $120,000 of his campaign cash for hush money to his prostitute. What would happen?"--interguru

Democrats would rise in unison and begin shouting "It's only about sex!" And that time, they'd be correct.

Admit it, interguru, all the covering for Clinton that the Democrats conducted in order to yank his lying-under-oath balls out of the fire rendered impotent their usual tactics of denigrate and defame.

JeffK from PA interguru a day ago
Then Republicans might actually like him. Hold him up as a 'real man'.
Sid Finster interguru a day ago
Fine, but that has nothing to do with the russiagate conspiracy theory.

In fact, if Trump were really a puppet of Russia, they'd never let him commit an unforced error that pointless. Some money could be funneled from any of a million sources, and nobody would be any the wiser.

Actually, Trump committed a lot of unforced errors, as well as being generally lazy, stupid and unprepared.

https://www.theguardian.com...

With this in mind, to believe the RussiaGate conspiracy theories, one must simultaneously believe that the Russians have abilities that border on psychic mind control superpowers, but at the same time, these same evil geniuses cannot be bothered to plan what to do if their nefarious schemes actually worked out.

Orwell wept.

One can easily accept that Trump is a roaring moron, but one also has to believe that his alleged puppetmaster cannot take the time to consult an attorney or a peruse a copy of the United States Code, available for free on the internet to anyone who bothers to take a peek. And that's just the legal requirements. I won't even go into the clownshow that was Trump's appointments and staffing.

Salt Lick 2 days ago
The testimony was a complete success because it maintained the status quo. Trump is not going anywhere, both Democrats and Republicans agreed that Russia tampered with the election rendering even more sanctions and increasing cold war tensions, and the only ones indicted were accused of process crimes. Meanwhile, the business of Goldman Sachs gets done in the halls of power.

Robert "Saddam has WMD of Mass Destruction" Mueller has been the bag man for the establishment for a long time. Even his dotage, he still managed to perform his job flawlessly.

Paddywagon 2 days ago
*42nd president's Senate trial
Sid Finster jimrussell 2 days ago
What utter nonsense, unless you believe that "Russia" wrote the DNC emails, or that a clickbait troll farm (see paragraph 95 of the IRA indictment if you don't believe me) that has no discernable connection tot he Russian government has some amazing influence over gullible American voters.
Sid Finster jimrussell a day ago
12 indictments against often former employees of a Russian clickbait farm for spectacularly laughable memes that will never amount to anything because there will never be a trial. One of the parties showed up in court and demanded actual evidence as part of discovery, causing Mueller to desperately ask for a continuance. The judge called Mueller out by denying it. The judge also called Mueller out by showing that he had no evidence that the defendant at issue had any ties tot he Russian government.

https://www.courthousenews....

A paltry $150k was spent for online ads over two years, by Russians, they tell you. They also tell you that about half those ads didn't run until after the election was over and that most of the ads didn't endorse a specific candidate or policy. Yet, you insist this Russian social media blitz altered the outcome of your election somehow. With well north of $3 billion spent on traditional advertising, leave it to MSM to float a turd of such odious girth.

Next, Mueller indicts 13 Russian intelligence journeymen and it will never amount to anything. None of them will ever be extradited. There will never be a trial. Never a legal discovery process. No burden of proof that they actually hacked or colluded. No US intelligence agency has ever examined the servers in question.

Russians didn't write the emails and Julian Assange is emphatic that Russia had nothing to do with them. Yet, no one in our vast and vaunted intelligence community has bothered to interview him. As they say, a smart lawyer never asks a question if he might not want to hear the answer.

Everything, all of it, is based on intel supplied by a cyber security firm on the DNC payroll. You can't make this shit up.

The other indictments are thoroughly unrelated to hacking or collusion by anybody, much less Russia.

W Porter 2 days ago • edited
Sen Specter did NOT "end the drive to impeach Bill Clinton", as the opening sentence of this article declares. The drive to impeach Bill Clinton ended when the House passed articles of impeachment. That's right: Bill Clinton was actually impeached. No, he wasn't "convicted" in his senate trial (thanks to Specter) and so wasn't removed from office. But he was, actually, impeached.

Good question for trivia buffs: Only one of these presidents was impeached: Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. Which one was it? (Hint: Nixon resigned before the House impeached him.)

Connecticut Farmer W Porter 2 days ago
An impeachment is another word for "indictment", and as the saying goes you can indict a ham sandwich. Or impeach a baloney sandwich. If Trump were to wind up in the dock it would be "anything goes", including subpoenas being issued to Madame Hillary. There won't be any impeachment. Too much of a danger of overflowing sewage.
Sid Finster 2 days ago
Seth Rich could rise up from the dead and show us all, live on CNN, how he leaked the DNC emails, right after DWS confessed on MSNBC to ordering Seth Rich's murder and HRC admitted under oath that she invented russiagate on a bet with Podesta to see whether people really are that stupid and gullible, and CNN, MSNBC and the entire DNC and their cultists would keep pushing the conspiracy theory, never even missing a beat.
Amanda Powell Sid Finster 2 days ago
I see the fever swamp is well represented today.
𝙆𝙧𝙖𝙯𝙮 𝙐𝙣𝙘𝙡𝙚 2 days ago
I'm thinking the Democrats just wanted Mueller to give them the go ahead on impeachment... that way they could always blame it on him if the ploy failed... Too bad they are such cowards that none of the want to sign their name to impeachment proceedings...
MM 2 days ago
I'm glad Mr. Mueller finally admitted publicly that he held the President to an Orwellian standard of "probably guilty, which we can't prove, until proven innocent, which we never do" that no American has ever been held to by law enforcement.

I'll illustrate:

Can anybody tell me the legal difference between those two statements? I really don't see any. Also, what was fascinating about Mr. Mueller's press conference was when he said this:

He actually paid indicted Russian nationals who will never stand trial in this country more constitutional lip service than Trump. Absolutely gorgeous...

Bag Man 2 days ago
If the Democrats were using Mueller as their smoking gun to nail Trump it failed miserably. If they still want to impeach go ahead. It guarantees Trump's reelection.
Rossbach a day ago
Mueller's investigation ended after all the subpoenas had been served, all the witnesses had been deposed, and all the evidence analyzed. If, after that, he could not determine that the president had committed a crime, then, according to established jurisprudential practice, the decision is that he is not guilty. It is singular that the 2 accusations, collusion and obstruction, were evaluated differently.

In the case of conspiracy ("collusion") the final report says, "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." In the case of obstruction of justice, the final report says, "If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment."

So, in the case of conspiracy, the prosecutor had to prove that the President was guilty ("did not establish" conspiracy); in the case of obstruction, they had to prove that he was innocent ("did not commit obstruction"). Why did different standards apply to the two accusations?

Mueller said he didn't recommend that the grand jury indict the President for obstruction because one cannot indict a sitting President. But the President either obstructed justice or he didn't. If he did, why didn't Mueller say so? He didn't have to recommend as indictment in order to state a conclusion based on facts revealed in the investigation. What he appears to be saying is that because he couldn't prove that the President did not commit obstruction, he would recommend that congress play impeachment politics with the issue.

So, instead of a resolution of this matter, Mueller decided to bequeath to the nation a festering sore that, with that aid of congressional Democrats, would continue to undermine the President's administration.

[Jul 27, 2019] Understanding the Roots of the Obama Coup Against Trump by Larry C Johnson

Highly recommended!
Evidence accumulates that Obama was the real leader of this color revolution against Trump with Brannan as his chief lieutenant and Comey as a willing accomplice.
Now that the dust has settled, one must ask why the Deep State wanted Trump gone. Why does the Obama-Clinton mafia hates him so much? Is this due to Trump committed an unforgivable sin in suggesting we “get along with Russia” and thus potentially cut the revenues of military-industrial complex ? This is not true -- Trump inflated the Pentagon budget to astronomical height. Then why ?
Notable quotes:
"... The full details of the plot to take out Donald Trump remain to be revealed. But there should now be no doubt that his effort was not the work of a few rogue intelligence and law enforcement officials acting on their own. This was a full blown covert action undertaken with the full knowledge and blessing of Barack Obama. ..."
"... Operation Crossfire Hurricane was launched the end of July 2016. CIA Director John Brennan briefed key Democrat members of Congress in early August on allegations that Donald Trump was colluding with Vladimir Putin. And Peter Strzok traveled to London in early August 2016 to meet with the CIA and with Alexander Downer, who was claiming that George Papadopolous was talking up the Russians. Following that trip Strozk texted the following to his mistress, Lisa Page : ..."
"... We also know that Senior Obama Administration officials, such as NSC Director Susan Rice and UN Ambassdor Samantha Power, were pushing to "unmask" Trump campaign officials who were named in US intelligence documents. ..."
"... Let us look at this from another angle. If the Russians were actually trying to interfere in the 2016 election, then it was known to both US intelligence and law enforcement. Hell, we are told in the Mueller report that the FBI detected the Russians trying to hack the DNC way back in 2015. If there really was intelligence on Russian efforts to meddle why did the Obama Administration do nothing other than sanction FBI's Crossfire Hurricane? ..."
"... On what basis did Barack Obama insist it was impossible to rig the US Presidential election? This is a critical anomaly. Why was the Obama team asleep at the switch, especially on the intel front, it the Russians actually were engaged in rigging the election to install Donald Trump? ..."
"... Obama seemed to have got a taste for spying on his domestic political opponents from monitoring Israeli attempts to block the Iran nuclear deal. I think the lock her up stuff really scared the Obama people, who had much to hide. ..."
Jul 27, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

The full details of the plot to take out Donald Trump remain to be revealed. But there should now be no doubt that his effort was not the work of a few rogue intelligence and law enforcement officials acting on their own. This was a full blown covert action undertaken with the full knowledge and blessing of Barack Obama.

As I have written previously , the claim that Russia tried to hijack our election is a damn lie. But you do not have to take my word for it. Just listen to Barack Obama speaking in October 2016 in response to Donald Trump's expressed concerns about election meddling :

"There is no serious person out there who would suggest that you could even rig America's elections, in part because they are so decentralized. There is no evidence that that has happened in the past, or that there are instances that that could happen this time," the president said to the future president in October 2016.

"Democracy survives because we recognize that there is something more important than any individual campaign, and that is making sure the integrity and trust in our institutions sustains itself. Becasue Democracy works by consent, not by force," Obama said.

"I have never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history, any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place. It is unprecedented. It happens to be based on no fact. Every expert regardless of political party... who has ever examined these issues in a serious way will tell you that instances of significant voter fraud are not to be found. Keep in mind elections are run by state and local officials."

It is important to remember what had transpired in the Trump/Russia collusion case by this point. Operation Crossfire Hurricane was launched the end of July 2016. CIA Director John Brennan briefed key Democrat members of Congress in early August on allegations that Donald Trump was colluding with Vladimir Putin. And Peter Strzok traveled to London in early August 2016 to meet with the CIA and with Alexander Downer, who was claiming that George Papadopolous was talking up the Russians. Following that trip Strozk texted the following to his mistress, Lisa Page :

Strzok: And hi. Went well, best we could have expected. Other than [REDACTED] quote: " the White House is running this. " My answer, "well, maybe for you they are." And of course, I was planning on telling this guy, thanks for coming, we've got an hour, but with Bill [Priestap] there, I've got no control .

Page: Yeah, whatever (re the WH comment). We've got the emails that say otherwise.

The White House clearly knew. But Strzok's text is not the only evidence. We also know that Senior Obama Administration officials, such as NSC Director Susan Rice and UN Ambassdor Samantha Power, were pushing to "unmask" Trump campaign officials who were named in US intelligence documents.

There are only two possibilities:

  1. Obama was being briefed by Susan Rice and DNI James Clapper and CIA Director about the project to take out Trump, or
  2. Obama was kept in the dark.

Let us look at this from another angle. If the Russians were actually trying to interfere in the 2016 election, then it was known to both US intelligence and law enforcement. Hell, we are told in the Mueller report that the FBI detected the Russians trying to hack the DNC way back in 2015. If there really was intelligence on Russian efforts to meddle why did the Obama Administration do nothing other than sanction FBI's Crossfire Hurricane?

On what basis did Barack Obama insist it was impossible to rig the US Presidential election? This is a critical anomaly. Why was the Obama team asleep at the switch, especially on the intel front, it the Russians actually were engaged in rigging the election to install Donald Trump?


turcopolier , 26 July 2019 at 04:19 PM

All

My wife was for many years an election official in Virginia. IMO Obama was right in saying that a US presidential election is impossible to "rig." The US Constitution requires that federal elections be run by the states WITHOUT federal supervision. As a result the methods and equipment in the states and the various parts of the states vary widely and the state systems are not tied together with a national electronic network as, for example, the system is in France where the result of a national election is reported on TeeVee immediately when the polls close.

Bill H , 26 July 2019 at 04:51 PM
Asking the question, "Can you cite one specific case where a single vote was definitively changed by Russian meddling?" causes panic in a person who is declaiming about the evils of Russian meddling in our elections.
Alexandria , 26 July 2019 at 07:02 PM
Bill H,

When you ask that question, the invariable retort is that the Russians are so clever that you wouldn't know that you were being gulled; or, when I say that I have never seen a Russian produced facebook ad, the rejoinder is that the Russians concentrated on Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio and, of course, I would have been privy to the bot-sent emails and facebook ads generated by the Internet Research Agency.

Jack said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 27 July 2019 at 12:41 AM
TTG

You've maintained all along that the Russians interfered in the election, yet I believe it is your position that the Russians did not change a single vote. Is that correct or do you believe the Russians changed the votes before tabulation?

What did the Russians do that the Trump and Hillary campaigns did not do? Did they also turnout the tens of thousands who showed up for Trump rallies that Hillary could never muster? Are they still turning out thousands at recent Trump rallies? I'm curious how come Brennan and Clapper could not turn out thousands to Hillary's rallies when according to our German friend "b", the omnipotent US Intel services just turned out a quarter of the population of Hong Kong to protest CCP authoritarianism?

Did the Israeli, Saudi and Chinese governments interfere in the election? How would you compare what they did to what you believe the Russians did?

uieter about it. All that is very different from the absolute covert nature of the Russian IO in the 2016 election. I have no idea what China did or is doing.

Larry Johnson -> The Twisted Genius ... , 27 July 2019 at 11:36 AM
You have no evidence for the so-called Russian IO. It is a fabrication. The lies on this are enormous. If the FBI really had detected GRU hacking of the DNC in 2015, which is claimed in the fabricated meme, then you would expect the FBI and the other counter intel elements of the USG to take action. THEY DID NOTHING.

The issue of Russian hacking only emerged when Hillary and the DNC learned that DNC emails were going to be put out by WIKILEAKS. Again, not one shred of actual evidence that the Russians did it, but blaming the Russians became a convenient excuse in a bid to divert attention from the real story--i.e,. Hillary and the DNC colluded to defeat Bernie Sanders.

The only real solid evidence of colluding with foreigners, in this case the Ukraine, comes courtesy of Hillary and her campaign. Hiring a foreign intel officer (ie. Steele) who then takes info from Russians of questionable background and spread it around as "truth". That was not a Russian IO. Pure Clinton IO.

blue peacock said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 27 July 2019 at 12:29 PM
"What the Russians did was insert misattributed information and disinformation into the election cycle...That is what separates the Russian IO from anything Clinton, Trump or any of their supporters did."

I believe supporters of both candidates did exactly what you say the Russians did - insert misattributed information & disinformation into the media stream. If you watch MSNBC or Fox on any given day there is much assertion & opinion masquerading as news. And the Twitter & Facebook and blog universe are teeming with stories and innuendo that are more fiction than fact all from anonymous accounts.

The Russia Collusion hysteria is replete with examples of "misattributed information and disinformation". It seems that yellow journalism is as American as apple pie.

The whole opaque PAC structure with names like "Americans for Democracy" funded by chain structures hiding the real financiers and calling up down is something that we see growing in every election cycle and is already of significant scale both in terms of financing and dubiousness.

It is also rather common that "experts" who are called upon to opine on issues routinely never disclose their conflicts of interest. Jeffrey Sachs and so many others on the payroll of CCP entities never disclose those payments as they extoll the virtues of offshoring our industrial base to China and are apologists for CCP espionage.

The Twisted Genius -> blue peacock... , 27 July 2019 at 01:42 PM
Blue peacock, supporters of Clinton and Trump did not put out misattributed info. They both put out truth, innuendo, exaggerations, misleading info and even outright lies, but they put it out as themselves. They didn't represent themselves as someone other than who they were. The PAC structure comes close to skirting this requirement for truthful attribution, but a quick internet search blows away the facades of these PACs. What the Russians did was pure black propaganda.
Fred -> The Twisted Genius ... , 27 July 2019 at 09:23 AM
TTG,

You mean the kindly grandmother, Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the United States, did not inform President Obama that the FBI had obtained a FISA warrant to surveil the Republican candidate for the presidency and members of his staff becasue he was working with Russians? Or do you mean that James Comey failed to tell his boss, Loretta Lynch; or do you mean John Brennan failed to tell Obama about that Steele dossier from Fusion GPS that Mueller know anything about; or do you mean that James Clapper failed to tell Jeh Johnson about that too? The Russians made them do all those things as part of an interference campaign, right? It couldn't have been they were corrupt and incompetant.

"Instead, Obama...." made an "If you like your doctor, you can keep you doctor" statement that he knew was completely false. Trump didn't win, Russians influenced Americans to vote for Trump, just ask the losers of the election, their paid sources and their colleagues in Congress. In fact Americans love Hilary so much she's just where in the polls right now?

catherine , 27 July 2019 at 12:20 AM
I continue to be astounded by the outrage at "Russian meddling". So some Russians used the internet to post true or false information on candidates in a election.... so what?...millions of American partisan trolls were doing the same thing for or against a candidate. We had tons of fake info written by American bloggers and posters all over the net, Facebook, twitter etc..

Its not like Putin came to the US and gave a speech to congress in favor of Trump ...as Netanyahu did in appearing before the US congress and urging them to go against President Obama's Syria policy for heaven's sake.
It is so ridiculous I have given up hope of finding enough IQs above that of a cabbage to form a sane government.

LondonBob , 27 July 2019 at 06:57 AM
Obama seemed to have got a taste for spying on his domestic political opponents from monitoring Israeli attempts to block the Iran nuclear deal. I think the lock her up stuff really scared the Obama people, who had much to hide.
J , 27 July 2019 at 12:27 PM
This has shown two things IMO

1. The FBI cannot be trusted to uphold defend and protect our Constitution, as they sought actively to overturn a duly elected POTUS.; and

2 - Mueller's incompetence is astounding.

Is the only entity of the Defense Department called the U.S. Army the only ones left actually upholding, defending, and protecting our Constitution and our Constitution processes? I don't see the other entities of the DOD called Navy and Air Force doing their jobs upholding our Constitution!

Thumbs up to the Army, thumbs down to the Navy and Air Force!

Mark Logan said in reply to J... , 27 July 2019 at 02:14 PM
J,

I'm a little more charitable to the FBI. The Trumps lied their asses off to the FBI about their foreign contacts. Which IMO, wrong or right, left the FBI all but no recourse but to investigate those lies. Even if the lies were simply based in long-seated personal habits, it takes investigation to prove that is the case.

plantman , 27 July 2019 at 12:55 PM
I believe Larry Johnson is right when he says:

"You have no evidence for the so-called Russian IO. It is a fabrication." In fact, Putin rejects the claim many times publicly saying that Russia does not meddle in foreign elections as a matter of policy. Maybe I'm gullible, but I find his disclaimer pretty convincing....

My question for Larry Johnson requires some speculation on his part: How did the claims of "Russia meddling" which began with the DNC and Hillary campaign, take root at the FBI, CIA and NSA???

Is there an unseen connection between the Democrat leadership and the Intel agencies??? And --if there is-- does that mean we are headed for a one-party system???

rg , 27 July 2019 at 01:46 PM
Larry, sorry to nitpick, but I have such regard for your work that it pains me to see the typographical error in your second sentence, where you say "his error" shortly after referring to Trump. I'm guessing that you meant to say "this error", but it reads as if it means "Trump's error".

And while I'm at it, your last sentence has "it" instead of "if".

Keep up your great work for this excellent website.

turcopolier , 27 July 2019 at 03:35 PM
Mark Logan

Sadly naive in that you think the conspirators were actually acting in good faith. You think they were right when they used the Steele Dossier in applying for a FISA warrant in Colyyer's Star Chamber? Steele was a paid informant for the FBI as was Page.

turcopolier , 27 July 2019 at 03:35 PM
Mark Logan

How do you know "they lied their asses off?" Mueller's report stated that no American had conspired with the Russians,

[Jul 26, 2019] Barr's Russiagate Origin Probe Pivots To 'Smoking Gun' Tapes With Exculpatory Evidence

Notable quotes:
"... Mueller is not currently mentally capable of programming his microwave, never mind author a report or conduct an investigation. ..."
"... I think if Barr digs deep enough he is going to see a foreign country was In control of Hillary during her state department days, and potentially Bubba during his presidency, remember how those secrets got leaked to China during Bill's Presidency? The preceding would also implicate that inner circle assisting Hill Dog, ie Comey, Clapper, MCabe, Brennan and the rest of those rat bastards BTW where is the computer guy that they were all using who got nabbed just before fleeing on a jet out of the country, What about Huma? ..."
"... Mueller was the token 'R'/Marine Vet/Never Trumper hired to give this corruption an air of 'fairness'. He was a tool, and has been for decades. Special place for him somewhere. ..."
"... Unfortunately the DNC clowns have discovered how to use Hillary's projection techniques and they are using them more and more. No matter what they do or what we discover they do they project it back on us. ..."
Jul 26, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Barr's Russiagate Origin Probe Pivots To 'Smoking Gun' Tapes With Exculpatory Evidence

by Tyler Durden Fri, 07/26/2019 - 17:05 0 SHARES

A DOJ internal review of the Russia investigation is now focusing on transcripts of (not-so) covertly recorded conversations between former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos and 'at least one government source' during an overseas conversation in 2016.

In particular, DOJ investigators are focusing on why certain exculpatory (or exonerating) evidence from the transcripts was not included in subsequent FBI surveillance warrant applications , according to Fox News , citing two sources familiar with the review.

"A source told Fox News that the "exculpatory evidence" included in the transcripts is Papadopoulos denying having any contact with the Russians to obtain the supposed "dirt" on Clinton," according to the report.

And while Fox doesn't name the 'government source,' it's undoubtedly Australian diplomat and Clinton ally Alexander Downer, who was "idiotic enough" to spy on Papadopoulos with his phone, according to the former Trump aide.

But Papadopoulos did not only meet with Mifsud and Downer while overseas. He met with Cambridge professor and longtime FBI informant Stefan Halper and his female associate, who went under the alias Azra Turk. Papadopoulos told Fox News that he saw Turk three times in London: once over drinks, once over dinner and once with Halper. He also told Fox News back in May that he always suspected he was being recorded . Further, he tweeted during the Mueller testimony about "recordings" of his meeting with Downer . - Fox News

"These recordings have exculpatory evidence," one source told Fox , adding " It is standard tradecraft to record conversations with someone like Papadopoulos -- especially when they are overseas and there are no restrictions. "

The recordings in question pertain to conversations between government sources and Papadopoulos, which were memorialized in transcripts. One source told Fox News that Barr and Durham are reviewing why the material was left out of applications to surveil another former Trump campaign aide, Carter Page.

" I think it's the smoking gun ," the source said. - Fox News

Also under review by AG Barr and US Attorney John Durham of Connecticut is the actual start date of the original FBI investigation into the Trump campaign and Russian interference in the US election.

Former Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) first revealed the existence of transcripts documenting the secretly recorded conversations earlier this year.

"If the bureau's going to send in an informant, the informant's going to be wired, and if the bureau is monitoring telephone calls, there's going to be a transcript of that," Gowdy said on Fox News in May.

"Some of us have been fortunate enough to know whether or not those transcripts exist. But they haven't been made public, and I think one, in particular ... has the potential to actually persuade people," he continued, adding "Very little in this Russia probe I'm afraid is going to persuade people who hate Trump or love Trump. But there is some information in these transcripts that has the potential to be a game-changer if it's ever made public. "

According to the report, the transcripts are currently classified - however President Trump's May order to approve declassification at AG Barr's discretion means they may see the light of day. And even if not, the declassification allowed Barr to barge in on DNI Director Dan Coats' office and demand the files .

A source told Fox News that without the declassification order signed by Trump, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats was not going to give anyone access to the files -- over concerns for protecting sources and methods. But another source told Fox News in May that Coats, along with CIA Director Gina Haspel and FBI Director Chris Wray, are all working "collaboratively" with Barr and Durham on the review.

Barr and Durham are also trying to pinpoint the actual "start date" of the investigation, according to a source. - Fox News

As passionately laid out by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) during this week's Mueller testimony, the FBI officially opened the Russia investigation after Papadopoulos told Downer about a rumor (told to him by Clinton Foundation member Joseph Mifsud) that Russia had 'dirt' on Hillary Clinton.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QC529hakU6U

That said, some have suggested that the FBI probe began long before Downer's report to intelligence agencies .

On Wednesday, House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., challenged former Special Counsel Mueller over when the investigation started.

"The FBI claims the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign began on July 31, 2016, but in fact, it began before that," Nunes said. "In June 2016, before the investigation was officially opened, Trump campaign associates Carter Page and Stephen Miller were invited to attend a symposium at Cambridge University in July 2016. Your office, however, did not investigate who was responsible for inviting these Trump associates to the symposium." - Fox News

"Maybe a better course of action is to figure out how the false accusations started," said Jordan on Wednesday, adding "Here's the good news -- that's exactly what Bill Barr is doing and thank goodness for that."


Ida_Noe , 2 minutes ago link

For what it's worth, I think the whole thing started w/Her campaign, in particular: Podesta (means, motive and opportunity). I think it began as a cheating strategy and snowballed into a coup; many ppl involved... Trump won (Thank G--!) and they've been trying to cover their tracks ever since

Anunnaki , 27 minutes ago link

They used Mueller's stellar reputation to unleash a Clinton/FBI witch hunt behind the scenes.

so obvious Mueller had nothing to do with the report with his name n it.

now his reputation is dog ****

SHADEWELL , 22 minutes ago link

Mueller is not currently mentally capable of programming his microwave, never mind author a report or conduct an investigation.

We are seeing a spectacular display of an ill advised poorly thought out conspiracy to take Trump down...

No one is really looking at why the desperation to get Hillary in, remember Cuntlery herself stated that if Trump were to be elected "we will all hang"

I think if Barr digs deep enough he is going to see a foreign country was In control of Hillary during her state department days, and potentially Bubba during his presidency, remember how those secrets got leaked to China during Bill's Presidency? The preceding would also implicate that inner circle assisting Hill Dog, ie Comey, Clapper, MCabe, Brennan and the rest of those rat bastards BTW where is the computer guy that they were all using who got nabbed just before fleeing on a jet out of the country, What about Huma?

Why the desperation to obliterate the server with bleach bit, and hammer pound the phones?

And what about the infamous Clinton Body Count...

Just sayin

whatafmess , 39 minutes ago link

Suddenly "enhanced interrogation" makes a whole lot more sense... Lets see how the tough marine remembers his training. As for Mifsud, he will likely instantly remember his past life as a canary the moment he's shown a fuckin phone book...

Fuckin traitors, no mercy

Nunny , 45 minutes ago link

Mueller was the token 'R'/Marine Vet/Never Trumper hired to give this corruption an air of 'fairness'. He was a tool, and has been for decades. Special place for him somewhere.

SHADEWELL , 57 minutes ago link

Becoming pretty clear at this point that the ***** that perpetrated this treason have pretty much already played out every option

Yes that's right Cuntlery...your time is coming Bitch. At what point do they just punt for the good of the country and accept guilt quietly. Nadler and Schiff keep pushing it, will go very badly after Horowitz report

rodguy911 , 15 minutes ago link

Unfortunately the DNC clowns have discovered how to use Hillary's projection techniques and they are using them more and more. No matter what they do or what we discover they do they project it back on us. With unending driveby complicity it always buys at least a few weeks or gets them to the next news cycle where they feel safe again. Complex criminality wreaks of the company.

moobra , 1 hour ago link

Alexander Downer is a the classic groomed fwit who was given a path to power so he could be controlled. He was the national leader of the opposition but was such a *** he was unelectable and dumped. Most cartoonists in Australia depict him in fishnet stockings. The usual *** of his generation who could never come out (like Mcron). Quite effeminate and in *** terms would be the bottom.

What a stumbling clown trying to play James Bond.

JBLight , 1 hour ago link

"That said, some have suggested that the FBI probe began long before Downer's report to intelligence agencies ."

The patriots already know that the entire Russia/Trump probe was just cover for illegal spying that they were doing WITHOUT FISA approval. The Russia/Trump probe was going to be their excuse.

LEEPERMAX , 1 hour ago link

The president was framed by the following BRITISH operatives:

Respect_The_Cock , 1 hour ago link

Mueller was a figurehead. In doing more reading and talking to some folks - I wonder how much he is to blame.

Hear me out: I don't think Mueller had his fastball when they installed him as Weismann's American Hero Gentile Beard - and they knew it.

so, who wanted Mueller so bad?

#GetWeissman

jeff montanye , 1 hour ago link

it's fortuitous in any case as the great first cause of the last generation of government malfeasance, 9-11, was investigated by mueller as head of the fbi for the bush administration. it keeps that more in the public eye and mind. it let's people see that the deep state is bipartisan: helps republican bush and democrat clinton. just as long as they both help the likud mossad.

fitZHugh , 38 minutes ago link

There's a LOT for which to blame Mueller. Whitey Bulger, Ruby Ridge, Pan Am flight 103 come immediately to mind. As for who wanted him so bad, I would hazard a guess it was all the democrats on his "staff" who needed the cover of a "conservative republican". I know, hard to say that with a straight face.

[Jul 26, 2019] Tucker What should happen to those who lied about Russian collusion

Highly recommended!
Jul 26, 2019 | www.youtube.com

Joe DeHaan , 6 hours ago

They should be charged with treason ! Investigation under false pretenses , ILLEGAL ! Contempt, obstruction ! Pick one !

John Roberts , 6 hours ago (edited)

They should be charged with sedition and hung in the capital square. BAN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!

Gary V , 6 hours ago

What a joke... MULLER appeared SENILE and incompetent led by Dems & their lawyers.

Troy Vincent , 2 hours ago

Exactly Tucker. Serious accountability is what we need for these maliciously lying government officials.

hp , 5 hours ago

Tucker is the last hope for main stream media. Keep up the good work.


Paul Haggar , 5 hours ago

Maybe Putin should get a twitter account haha...... I wonder how he likes the sanctions Pres Trump has placed on Russia

cardsblues219 , 7 hours ago

Schiff has to be charged with treason.

F16 Pilot 4 TRUMP , 4 hours ago (edited)

Tucker you forgot to mention the millions of Iraqs that got killed in the Gulf war over wmds..

Stephan Desy , 5 hours ago

I agree wholeheartedly with Tucker Carlson...This whole stupid Russia hysteria propagated by most of the media made me, an old timer liberal, agree with Tucker. Well played Democratic Party... well played.

G7Batten Batten , 2 hours ago

Exact on the spot as so often. Absolutely nothing will change unless the guilty are punished. May God continue to protect and guide you Tucker.

Zlatko Sich , 7 hours ago

Prison time, for Lying when you work for government. Same for journalists and television(lying and fake news ). This is a solution.

Ryan Mangrum , 43 minutes ago

It was a coup attempt. They should be charged with sedition and/or treason.

Guitarzan , 6 hours ago

Tucker's question about what should happen to the people who attempted to reverse the will of the American people? The answer is very straightforward. Those found guilty of sedition and treason should by law hanged by the neck until dead. This might discourage further efforts to undermine the will of the American people.

Frank Perez , 2 hours ago

They should go to jail, let's make an example of them. They wasted millions of the American tax money on a witch hunt...

[Jul 26, 2019] Tucker: Democrats believed Mueller would save America

Highly recommended!
He was like a deer in headlights. Mueller's testimony riddled with shaky moments, incomplete answers - YouTube
Looks like Mueller is not currently mentally capable of programming his microwave, never mind to be the primary author of his eport or supervise the investigation.
Shouldn't James Comey and Rod Rosenstein be sitting there, its obvious to me that Mueller is the patsy here.
Jul 26, 2019 | www.youtube.com

cannonball666 , 19 hours ago

Mueller: What page are you referencing? I can't find it"

Rep: "Sir, you have the report upsidedown"

Kris Roberts , 23 hours ago

"A daft old man blinking in the sunlight once the curtain has been opened"😅🤔🤣😂

Diana Seip , 1 day ago

Nadler should be charged with elderly abuse making Mueller testify today.

Louis Frost, 1 day ago

What's Fusion GPS???
Houston we have a problem,

[Jul 26, 2019] James Clapper Suggests Mueller Was Just A Figurehead And Didn't Even Write His Own Report

Was is acting as a preemptive defense so that Mueller could use figurehead status as a defense in the upcoming civil and criminal actions. like a Mafioso acting crazy in court thinking maybe they'll get a lighter sentence or let go due to insanity.
Notable quotes:
"... Mueller's performance raised questions that reached far beyond one appearance before one committee. It called into doubt the degree to which Mueller was in charge of the entire special counsel investigation ..."
"... When FBI agents ran around doing perjury traps, he was just as surprised as anyone.. Foreign honey traps and domestic wiretaps, no idea who was doing that. And the same judges who signed the arrest warrants on no evidence will certainly see it his way. ..."
"... According to Mueller, it wasn't "within his purview" to look into the meetings of Natalia Veselnitskaya with the Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson immediately before and after the "Trump Tower meeting" (that the media kept yammering about endlessly). Mueller didn't even know what Fusion GPS is (the compiler of the phony Steele dossier). ..."
"... It was the Weissman investigation and the Weissman report. He should be subpoenaed to testify about what they did. ..."
Jul 26, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Lead prosecutor Andrew Weissman was with Hillary Clinton on election night and praised acting AG Sally Yates for not enforcing Trump's travel ban. Aaron Zebley, another Mueller team member, represented the IT aide that smashed Clinton's Blackberrys while under subpoena.

Zebley was next to Mueller on Wednesday to "advise" him on questions and was clearly more well versed on the report than Mueller himself was.

Mueller's embarrassing testimony - during which he admitted he wasn't even familiar with Fusion GPS - is being panned not only by conservatives, but also by Democrats, as we reported yesterday.

Conservative columnist Byron York wrote yesterday:

"Mueller's performance raised questions that reached far beyond one appearance before one committee. It called into doubt the degree to which Mueller was in charge of the entire special counsel investigation ."


holmes , 16 seconds ago link

Either Mueller was a figurehead or that was some acting job yesterday by the POS

scraping_by , 1 minute ago link

Mueller could use figurehead status as a defense in the upcoming civil and criminal actions. Rather than leaking prosecution information he just watched it happen, powerless to prevent it.

When FBI agents ran around doing perjury traps, he was just as surprised as anyone.. Foreign honey traps and domestic wiretaps, no idea who was doing that. And the same judges who signed the arrest warrants on no evidence will certainly see it his way.

Bernard_2011 , 2 minutes ago link

According to Mueller, it wasn't "within his purview" to look into the meetings of Natalia Veselnitskaya with the Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson immediately before and after the "Trump Tower meeting" (that the media kept yammering about endlessly). Mueller didn't even know what Fusion GPS is (the compiler of the phony Steele dossier).

pmc , 2 minutes ago link

James Clapper has to say Mueller probably didn't conduct the investigation after it became obvious. It wouldn't surprise me at all to find Clapper had something to do with the Russia probe!

They've been trying to portray Russia as an enemy to reignite a cold war just to keep the military industrial complex going! Unfortunately for the deep state, they're living in the past!

I love your wife , 12 minutes ago link

I wonder if Clapper will claim "figure head" status if he's implicated in wrongdoing via the forthcoming IG Report on FISA.

Bernard_2011 , 14 minutes ago link

It was the Weissman investigation and the Weissman report. He should be subpoenaed to testify about what they did.

[Jul 26, 2019] Mueller seemed to be not aware of many details of the investigation done under his name.

Jul 26, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mueller seemed to be not aware of many details of the investigation done under his name.

He said he knew nothing about GPS, the company hired by the Clinton campaign to contract with MI6 agent Christopher Steele to fabricate the 'dirty dossier'. There were lots of reports about GPS in the media and Mueller missed all of them?

He refused to answer why he did not indict Joseph Mifsud, a mysterious Maltese professor who planted the claim that 'Russia has dirt on Hillary Clinton' with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos later repeated that claim. The FBI then used that fact as the reason to launch its investigation against the Trump campaign. In his report Mueller claimed, without showing evidence, that Mifsud worked for Russia. That is unlikely and there is actual evidence that he worked with the British MI6.

Mifsud lied to the Mueller investigation. But unlike others witnesses who lied, Mueller never indicted him for making false statements. He punted on questions about this issue with multiple "Can't get into that."

He reacted similar when he was asked about Christopher Steele, the British agent who created and peddled the fake 'dirty dossier'.

There is still another Justice Department investigation ongoing that will look at the whole Russia affair from a different viewpoint. Was the FBI investigation into 'Russiagate' an illegal partisan effort to go after Trump? Who really initiate the whole 'Russiagate' campaign that seems to have been run by the British MI6? Was it John Brennan, Obama's CIA director, involved?

Little is known about that second investigation. It will hopefully come up with better evidence and results than the one Robert Mueller led.

[Jul 26, 2019] Ron Paul Forget Russiagate, Look At FBI-gate Instead

Jul 26, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Ron Paul: Forget Russiagate, Look At FBI-gate Instead

by Tyler Durden Thu, 07/25/2019 - 22:15 0 SHARES

Via 21stCenturyWire.com,

Yesterday, the Democratic Congress had their big moment – the testimony of Russiagate probe figurehead Robert Mueller, whose 448-page report detailing the findings of his nearly-two-year-long investigation into alleged "Trump-Russian collusion" and alleged "Russian interference" in the US 2016 elections.

After no evidence of collusion or interference could be found, the remit was then shifted over to "possible obstruction of justice. " And when no evidence of obstruction could be unearthed, the Democrat and Mueller position then became, 'the Mueller Report has not cleared Trump of obstruction,' or the report does not exoneration of the President. Here they are trying to prove a negative, something which could be said about about any unproven accusation leveled against anyone – which makes that spurious declaration meaningless.

Even the most ardent Never Trump partisan journalists, like NBC News political director Chuck Todd, admitted that the former special counsel Robert Mueller's performance in front of the House Judiciary Committee hearing was a "disaster" and did nothing to advance the cause for impeachment.

As the dust subsides from yesterday's debacle, the real issues are finally coming into focus.

Former US Congressman Dr Ron Paul highlights some of the deeper, fundamental problems with the Russiagate fiasco. RT International reports...

The Democrats' dream of impeaching President Trump over the Russiagate scandal has "totally failed," its fate confirmed by special counsel Robert Mueller's disastrous showing in Congress, former congressman Ron Paul told RT.

The utterly anticlimactic hearing saw the ex-special counsel serving up reheated details of his two-year probe into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, reminding both the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees that there was no proof that members of the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.

" Hopefully, this will end it all, because Mueller did not have any evidence ," Paul said.

"I think we should never use the word Russiagate again. I think we ought to use the FBIgate because there was a conspiracy to try to frame Trump ."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/egjbkJ8mTFc

" If they have impeachment hearings next year, it is going to backfire on them, just as I think this hearing today backfired on the Democrats ," Paul said, suggesting that lawmakers should instead investigate the origins of the Russia probe – in particular the Steele dossier, which was partially funded by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic Party. The document, produced by Fusion GPS, was full of unsubstantiated tales about Trump and helped to kick off the FBI probe, yet when pressed on the key role of the opposition research firm, Mueller didn't even appear to be familiar with the organization.

Both parties have much bigger problems, Paul pointed out, marveling at how Democrats and Republicans are "bosom buddies," marching in lockstep on "more debt, more interference, more involvement overseas, more welfare-ism," yet "they hate each other's guts when it comes to power."

"The empire's broke, the empire's in trouble, yet [both parties] don't want to talk about that."


AI Agent , 23 minutes ago link

  1. This is the post fact world. Reality and objective facts do not matter. We keep refering to facts as if it meant something to the Democrat hoards. It doesn't.
  2. The dead white man principles of innocent until proven guilty is now "if we don't like you, guilty until proven innocent" and "If we like you, you can be a customer for a pedophile pimp".
  3. Smears and lies work to get the votes of people who don't have an American ideal in them. The Founders and the Globlist knew that our republic needs a informed and patriotic electorate, and the Globalist filled us with ignorant stupid America hating foreigners who hate us and want "Gibs".
San Pedro , 30 minutes ago link

The ooobama brain fucked the FBI (FIB??)...fire all executives and ooobama related FBI political officers and start all over again. The FBI is the ooobama's personal weaponized political "Just Us" army. Fire em. Watch em all squeal and out the ooobama.

AI Agent , 22 minutes ago link

The FBI is an US federal institution that ignores federal crimes like mishandling classified information, engages in crimes like seditious conspiracy to over throw the government, and spends countless hours trolling social media looking for folks who think it's all da joozes fault.

SybilDefense , 34 minutes ago link

Why won't the news streams report on the Bensenson Strategy Groups "salvage report" that was prepared for John Podesta (WikiLeaks October dump), which in black and white lists suggestion Create Russian Red Dawn. Read the report here and see if not every unexplainable action cannot be easily explain, once you have the priv of reading the same Dem playbook Podesta used for Hillary. Google it if you fear the link above. Use Podesta WikiLeaks Bensenson Strategy Group Salvage Report in your search request.... It's all there sports fans:Russiagate, the rise of Antifa, BLM, Zika virus scare, our edging towards civil strife/war... All listed cookbook style and itemized with the pros and cons of each suggestion.

The MSM is not afraid to expose Fusion GPS, a similar firm, perhaps because they had to, but BSG who was the Mastermind of both Obama run, and also worked for Hillary and her foundation seems to be totally off limits. I am amazed the report is still searchable.

So instead of dragging olMuels up for the slaughter, why not expose the source. John Podesta, as per BSG, for Hillary created out of thin air Russiagate. My question is, with so many agency leaders, politicians, leaders etc all in on this, knowing first hand this is false, made up, political theater created and implemented by Hillary and Podesta...why are they continuing to defend Her? They could be facing treason charges, or have lost their jobs and legacies...all for Her.

What deathgrip does she still have on these people whom, once exposed, will be proven to have participated in America's first presidential coup. Would you risk your life and livelyhood for anyone besides your family, let alone Hillary. What goo does she have on these degenerates? Is it Epstein, Pizzagate blackmail, or a simple fear of being Seth Rich'd if one does not toe her party line?

BSG Salvage Report - Perhaps the most important and enlightening 4 pages you will read this decade. It's your sunglasses that allow you to see the aliens who have infiltrated our country's top positions. Don't be a sheep. Get woke too.

40MikeMike , 53 minutes ago link

Famous But Incompetent

Sure earned it.

40MikeMike , 44 minutes ago link

Mueller certainly did.

He's been a total flop and dupe his entire career. No debate there.

He was duped as a failing intelect and brai iis bound to be. The gigantic embarassment of yesterday's conference seals his bumbling reputation.

Whitey, the Hell Angels, the suicide guilty anthrax killer laughed their collective azzes off at his buffoonery. No debate.

Silver Fox 47 , 54 minutes ago link

Federal Bureau of Instigating.

terrific , 56 minutes ago link

Everybody knows that the illegal behavior of the FBI, AG, CIA, and all the rest, was performed under the order of Barack Obama. It can't be proven, because the orders went through Valerie Jarrett, but UNDOUBTEDLY, that filthy disgusting dog Barack Obama was the one and only person who gave the orders. What scum he is. Consequently, nobody will ever sit down again with the FBI for an interview, unless they consult with an attorney first. Nobody trusts the government. Maybe Donald Trump can get back some of the trust if he's allowed to serve another term, but public trust in the government is still in shambles.

[Jul 26, 2019] Mueller, The Mayor Of Munchkin-land, Democrat Misadventures

Jul 26, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

The two-year inquisition was run by attorneys Andrew Weissmann and Jeanie Rhee, two arch Hillary Clinton partisans (the latter a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation), leading now to the conclusion that the Mueller Investigation itself was no less a Clinton operation than the Steele Dossier. I wonder if it will become known whether Mrs. Clinton herself was in regular communication with Weissmann and Rhee during these years, or who were the intermediaries between them. Surely federal attorney John Durham has the mojo to seize phone records of the Mueller Team and find out exactly who was checking in with whom.

I, for one, even doubt that the lingering assertion of Russian "interference" in the 2016 election -- taken as dictum by too many dupes -- has any merit at all. Rather it was just a foggy byproduct of the mighty gaslighting effort by experienced Intel Community specialists working the zealously biased and credulous news media into a lather of bad faith. All of the Russians and "Russian agents" lassoed into narrative appear to have professional connections to either the CIA, the FBI, the US State department, or Mrs. Clinton's various networks of myrmidons in the DNC, the Obama administration, and Fusion GPS. These relationships were all sedulously ignored by the Special Counsel's office -- and now they can't be.

Hence, it is easy to imagine that Attorney General Barr and his lead investigator, Mr. Dunham, must now entertain the unappetizing prospect of examining the roles of Mrs. Clinton and the foregoing cast of characters in this melodrama for the purpose of discovering whether this was actually the seditious conspiracy that it appears to have been -- with rather horrific possible consequences of grave charges and severe punishments.

In all this long and excruciating public playing-out of dark schemes, Mr. Trump, first candidate and now president, seems to have acted as little more than a tackling dummy for the Mueller Team and its backstage confederates. He tweeted childishly about the deeply partisan composition of the Mueller Team when he should have mounted a forceful legal opposition to the effrontery of their selection in the first place.

It's interesting to follow the pronouncements of the bit-players in this spectacle, now that Mr. Mueller has inadvertently destroyed the basis of the sacred narrative . Rep. Jerold Nadler turned up yakking with Anderson Cooper on CNN last night, looking every inch like the Mayor of Munchkin Land, bloviating against the supposed imminent Russian takeover of America (read: by witches) and the now-receding fool's errand of impeachment, which would only further expose the criminal culpability of his own Democratic Party in this sordid misadventure. Mr. Cooper looked deeply pained by the chore, and yet his own professional credibility is on the line after two years of allowing himself to be played like a flugelhorn by the folks who matter in this country, and he contested nothing in Mr. Nadler's mendacious pratings.

And now a fretful silence will descend around this colossal goddamned mess as the momentum of history shifts against the perpetrators of it, and the true machinery of American justice is brought to bear upon them. The playing-out of Act Three will probably coincide with epic global financial disorder in the months ahead, further obscuring what people and nations can do to arrest the collapse of Modernity and its sidekick Human Progress.


tripletail , 5 hours ago link

Clearly, this was a DS psyop that worked beautifully against both sides of the pathetic US political divide. We all bought into it. But it's time to see it for what it is, and move on. Period.

Pritchards Ghost , 5 hours ago link

Just now at Guatamala signing POTUS said let's look at obmas and hillarys back ground...

"...let's subpoena all of obmas records...all of hillarys records..."

Yikes.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/26/trump-suggests-issuing-subpoenas-for-obama-hillary-clinton-records/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-recommends-investigation-into-obama-book-deal

CalifornianSeven , 5 hours ago link

Mueller's "I'm a frail dumb **** voice" reminded me of Blasey Ford's "I'm a innocent child" voice...

jimbobbrown , 5 hours ago link

It has always been assumed -- indeed it's been considered a truth -- that no way, no how will Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama faces ANY consequences for their part in this epic scandal. However ... we are in different times ... times when there's a real need for the machinery of government to SHOW the populace that "no one is above the law." Not just repeat the words ... but SHOW it. While it might be assured that neither will be CONVICTED, or IF convicted neither will face the sort of legal punishment that they should (lengthy federal prison sentences, at a minimum, and possibly execution) ... there's a greater chance TODAY that they will actually be put on trial.

Is there an actual legal/constitutional case to be made that as Commander-in-Chief of the United States military at the time of certain actions Obama could actually be charged under military law and face a military court?

gzorp , 5 hours ago link

Muellers traitorous career included fronting the FBI in the 911 coverup.

, most crucially trashing the Treasury dept investigation under O'Neill (the Green Quest raids early 2002) that laid out all the islamic financing etc. All this led straight to Grover Norquist, Karl Rove, D Scumbag Bushlips '43, and all your favorite republipigs..... The hamsters have been treated to paeans of praise for st. Mueller, not so much has the so-called media exposed the actual factual record....

MrBoompi , 6 hours ago link

The oligarch owners of the financial system have governments by the balls. Powerful leverage in case somebody starts sniffing around for crimes committed by these folks. Elected and non-elected government officials will be the fall guys in case somebody has to go to jail. People like Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Mueller, Clinton, and Obama take their orders from higher ups.

Real Estate Guru , 6 hours ago link

One of the most damning and incredible things that happened in the Muller testimony yesterday:

Mueller, when asked why he didn't investigate Fusion GPS and the Steele dossier said... "I didn't investigate it because it happened before I got there." lol!!

And nobody followed up on that. Nobody. Not one person up there on that panel.

Think about that for a minute: he was appointed to investigate Russia influence into our election. ALL of this happened before he got there!! What is he supposed to investigate?...things that are going to happen in the FUTURE??! What is this..."pre-crime" and some Tom Cruise movie?

Of course this moron is supposed to investigate what HAPPENED in the PAST! If you don't do that, what were you here for??? YOU CAN'T WAIT FOR THE FUTURE TO INVESTIGATE SOMETHING! Mueller was appointed Special Prosecutor to investigate what happened, not what may happen later! Investigators are supposed to investigate what happened, not things that haven't happened yet!

This whole thing is a set-up and is a sham!

Bottom line: This was the set up by the democrats, to run the clock out through the election in 2018, and hopefully, for them,...2020. This will go down as the biggest scandal in the history of this country, right behind Pearl Harbor, JFK, and 911.

NOW, the IGReport and the Barr Investigation with bulldog Durham will uncover all the **** they did which is all 100% treason. The IGreport is going to be released after Labor Day. And it may take as long as December. I have heard both.

The IG Report and Barr will be the truth and the facts. It will be the counter to Mueller's fake investigation, which was just part of the "insurance policy" and the attempted take down of Trump which didn't work. Instead, it wiped out all credibility of the democrats.

"The democrats had nothing when they did the Mueller Report. And they left with less than nothing after it."

-President Trump

By the way...Volume 1 of the report was about collusion, which they found him to be not guilty, because they had zero evidence. Then they illegally switched to "obstruction", in Volume 2....and had zero evidence of that either. That Volume is full of nothing but articles in the Washington Times, Post, etc. that was leaked to them by Comey, Weissmann, etc. , and was then grabbed promptly by the crooked FBI and used as "evidence" against Trump!.

And none of these perps were required to testify! Their "testimony" was in there books, lol!

One of the footnotes in the Mueller Report said that "one person told another person that somebody said that there was going to be a chess match in NY City and Trump was going to be there." lol!!!

That is evidence???

When the IG Report coems out, and especially when Barr finished the investigation of the investigators, this will all come out and will blow everyone away. Add to that the Epstein stuff and it will nail a ton of these corrupt and crooked people in politics.

Real Estate Guru , 6 hours ago link

BOOM!!!

News

WATCH: GOP Lawmaker Presses Mueller Into Admitting He Held Trump To A Different Standard

Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller admitted on Wednesday that the determination of his report held President Donald Trump to a different standard than the Department of Justice holds any other individual under investigation.

"You said in Volume 1, on the issue of conspiracy, the special counsel determined that the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities," Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) said during the House Judiciary Committee hearing. "Then in volume 2 the special counsel did not make a determination on whether there was an obstruction of justice crime committed by the president."

"The evidence we obtained about the president's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred," Ratcliffe continued, reading directly from Mueller's report. "Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/

Ratcliffe, a former prosecutor, argued that the findings of the report violated Department of Justice (DOJ) policies and principles by abstaining from exonerating Trump after the Special Counsel failed to conclusively determine that he was innocent of all accusations.

"Your report, and today, you said that at all times the special counsel team operated under, was guided by, and followed Justice Department policies and principles," Ratcliffe said. "So, which DOJ policy or principle sets forth a legal standard that an investigated person is not exonerated if their innocence from criminal conduct is not conclusively determined?"

After repeating the question multiple times, Mueller failed to provide a clear answer.

"Can you give me an example other than Donald Trump where the Justice Department determined that an investigated person is not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determined?" Ratcliffe asked.

Mueller replied that he could not identify another person who was ever held to the same standard as Trump, but added that "this is a unique situation."

"You can't," Ratcliffe said. "Time is short, I've got five minutes, let's just leave it at 'you can't find it' because I'll tell you why: it doesn't exist."

The Texas congressman slammed Mueller for stepping outside his purview in trying to conclude if Trump was innocent and if he should be exonerated.

"The special counsel's job, nowhere does it say that you were to conclusively determine Donald Trump's innocence or that the special counsel report should determine whether or not to exonerate him," Ratcliffe said. "It's not in any of the documents, it's not in your appointment order, it's not in the special counsel regulations, it's not in the OLC opinions, it's not in the justice manual, and it's not in the principles of federal prosecution."

"Nowhere do those words appear together because respectfully, respectfully, director, it was not the special counsel's job to conclusively determine Donald Trump's innocence or to exonerate him because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence," he continued. "It exists for everyone. Everyone is entitled to it including sitting presidents."

RenegadeOutcast , 6 hours ago link

decent article but let's clear up a couple of things:

no one, not barr nor any on his team and certainly not anyone in the red half of earth is considering the ensuing russiagate-gate as an 'unappetising prospect.'

this = 'with rather horrific possible consequences of grave charges and severe punishments' - make us moist.

doesn't the author also want to see justice done?

second, anderson cooper is cia. cnn is a ruler media centre - you know because they all are. but cooper is pure intelligence, so again, he's well aware of everything that is going on.

most people still seem to be a bit too naive about this play we're watching.

InTheLandOfTheBlind , 5 hours ago link

Not disagreeing that anderson is alphabet agency, but to assume he is in the loop is counter to how intelligence really works

[Jul 26, 2019] It's clear Mueller didn't write this report Alan Dershowitz

Jul 26, 2019 | www.youtube.com

Angel Reed , 1 day ago

Anyone notice that the ringleaders are no where to be found? Where is Hillary and Obama?

SwapPart TV Repair , 1 day ago

Obviously, Mueller was just a puppet. The entire reason they dragged it out for so long was to keep the collusion narrative going until after the midterms.

Michael Taylor , 1 day ago

Color me crazy, but Mueller had no trouble hearing democrats, but the asked almost every republican to repeat questions and muddled his lengthy responses as a stalling tactic?

James OHara , 1 day ago

He did not know supposedly who Fusion GPS was, and did not remember who first appointed him in Govt!

kissmyaass1 , 1 day ago

It is obvious now that Weissman wrote the report and they just used Mueller for his name.....so shameful!

Jim F. , 1 day ago

Mueller wasn't in charge of anything. He isn't even in charge of his own mind. He could hardly speak straight between deception and lies.

kmeccat , 1 day ago

Mueller looks old, weak, pathetic and his eyes look somewhat confused. Wouldn't be surprised if he's slipping into dementia.

Greg Braddy , 1 day ago

There is no doubt who was in control of The Mueller Special Counsel. It was Andrew Weissman, a disgraced prosecutor of people convicted in the Enron Scandal. Convictions that were later thrown out by The Supreme Court.

Johnny Toobad , 1 day ago

Rober Mueller, Godfather of the SWAMP, Just when you thought he was out...They drag him back in..

Robert D , 1 day ago

So Mueller lied when he was asked if he reviewed the entire report & he stands by report. But during his testimony he couldn't answer or really colaborate/substantiate anything in the report. WOW??? This is astounding & an embarrassment.

showtime951 , 18 hours ago

Mueller is a disgrace to America and a credit to The Third Reich.

Ken Potter , 1 day ago

Mueller should put on Black-Frame Glasses and say, "What Difference, at this point, does it make?"

[Jul 25, 2019] In the old days on Capitol Hill it was " I have no recollection Senator ". Today on Capitol Hill its " I can't get into that "

Jul 25, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

I am Groot , 2 minutes ago link

In the old days on Capitol Hill it was " I have no recollection Senator ".

Today on Capitol Hill its " I can't get into that "

The lies change, but the ******** always stays the same.

That jerk Mueller could have just pleaded the 5th, walked out, and saved us all an afternoon of watching more BS.

captain-nemo , 13 minutes ago link

So this is who the liberals have warshipped as a God the last years. What a mess of a man. He was clearly off his meds and also clearly needed medical help with his dementia. One thing is clear though. He has never ever read his own report. He has not written a word of whats in it and he didn't seem to even know what was in in an what it was all was about. Hell he didn't even know who his own friend were. So why should he be payed for his work? He didn't actually do anything. The only thing he actually knew was that he hated Trump for some reason.

CatInTheHat , 15 minutes ago link

Mueller is a complete FRAUD. And if corp media showed the endless footage that they are now showing, trying to frame this as a win for Democrats, and at the same time showing Mueller LYING to Congress about IRAQI WMD. Would Democratic voters be so willing to back this criminal if they knew the Robert Mueller back story. . So completely obvious.

At one point when asked about his investigation and that it was filled with "Clinton supporters", Mueller started going off by asking never in his blah blah years of doing this has he ever been asked such a question and that his investigation had INTEGRITY. W.T.F????

It was OUTRAGEOUS to watch this man feign outrage about how filled with integrity his investigation was and that it wasn't political!! Talk about Orwellian spin???

This **** show is how fucked up our political 2 party system of FRAUD really is. Unbelievable.

MagicCooler , 20 minutes ago link

Sekulow is wrong about one thing here -- this is not "over"!

The Horowitz (IG) report is coming, and Durham will almost certainly hand out a few indictments at the least.

This is far from "over".

Schroedingers Cat , 30 minutes ago link

Why aren't these liars being charged and arrested? I despise Trump but I despise people using treachery to undermine the office of the Presidency and the government of the United States even more. They could be guilty of treason. They probably are. I am most definitely not a MAGA guy. That said, the enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend. These potential (demonstrable) traitors have done far worse than Trump ever has.

[Jul 25, 2019] Mueller Sgt. Schultz act

Jul 25, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

Pam Ho , Jul 25 2019 0:11 utc | 63

Today besides Dems creating drama for future campaign ads, we were all amused by Keyser M̶u̶e̶l̶l̶e̶r̶ Söze putting on his best Sgt. Schultz act "I know nothing, I see nothing."

Mike Whitney wrote about the outcome of this being a dud a few months ago: Tit For Tat? Why Did Mueller Let Trump Off the Hook? . Whitney said that Russiagate was all about containing Trump's foreign policy agenda, to try to force him to go along with the Blob--and when Trump started to do that, that is when Mueller "finished" and found "nothing to see here folks" when he could have dragged it on for years.

I also wrote about that idea 2 years ago, also saying that Russiagate was all about forcing Trump to change his foreign policy goals through impeachment threats. I used to think it was the Saudis behind egging the Dems on towards impeachment as a way to pressure Trump into going along with their agenda for the Middle East,i.e., letting Trump's people know they could bribe enough people to get the Russiagate dog and pony show to go away if Trump wouldn't leave Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yemen, and also attack Iran, at least financially. I wrote how they tried to get Obama to do their bidding but he wouldn't capitulate fully in Syria, and that is why the Saudis and Netanyahu hated on Obama so fiercely.

Now I am not so sure if the Saudis and Netanyahu were behind it, it could be coming from the foreign policy establishment, not just Americans but also Russian oligarchs on the outs with Putin, also oligarchs from the UK and Europe, Ukraine, Georgia, etc. and mostly all about containing Russia economically and geopolitically. Or I could be right and it is about the Middle East. My idea was that the impeachment talk by the Dems would end if Trump did what MbS and Netanyahu want him to do. How do we know which is correct? If Trump starts a war with Iran and impeachment talk ends, then I was right because the foreign policy establishment does not want a war with Iran. We know that because recently various major domos of the establishment and oligarchs like Soros and Koch have been trying to talk Trump out of a military conflict with Iran.


lysias , Jul 25 2019 0:15 utc | 64

The hearings made it clear that Mueller did not write the report. His staff did, and he just rubber-stamped it. His recollection of what was in the report was so defective that I suspect he hadn't even read the whole thing.
karlof1 , Jul 25 2019 2:03 utc | 71
John Merryman @76--

Thanks for your reply!

I picked up my used copy of Super Imperialism back in 1978 and have tried to keep up with Hudson since. When I first began commenting at our bar, I often touched on our dysfunctional culture as being at the ultimate root of our multiple dilemmas, and that speaks to your 2nd & 3rd paragraphs. As I've expressed, IMO US and by extension EU society is coming to a state of Critical Mass but not simultaneously. Much of the former USSR and Soviet Bloc went through this experience first, but it was of a different sort and parts are now going through a second phase with Ukraine and Georgia being examples. The EU had Greece and now France, but they are all disparate although they share commonalities. The anti-union regions of the USA are all hurting with their $7.25 minimum wage and great lack of basic services; yet, the wealthier regions aren't doing as well as it may seem at first glance as exemplified by the many working homeless. Both Trump and Sanders fed off these disaffections in 2016, and things are worse now than then.

As it stands, we are all students at this bar; none are Masters with answers, although some try to project that visage. Most interactions are helpful even if not replied to as the differing POV are the same as a different school of thought, promote reevaluation, further thinking, and analysis. So, thanks again for your replies, and to all the others that participate.

[Jul 25, 2019] The biggest problem about the whole Mueller thing is his own history. A verifiable history of collusion with the owners of the US

Jul 25, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

nottheonly1 , Jul 25 2019 15:24 utc | 121

The biggest problem about the whole Mueller thing is his own history. A verifiable history of collusion with the owners of the US. He did their bidding so obviously, so many times, that whoever has lined themselves up behind this guy - can only be part of a much deeper problem than meets the eye.

Mueller supported the bombing of Yugoslavia, the Iraq war and the lawlessness of the Bush regime. He acted, in what can only be called the bi-partisan deception of the American people, for decades now. This person is under no circumstances to be trusted - with whatever leaves his vocal chords.

Alan Watts stated once so fittingly "Who polices the police? Who rules the rulers?" and the answer is neither obvious, nor is it subject of widespread discussion.

The disservice Mueller did to the American people can only be compared by going back in time and taking a deep look at the Democratic party establishment around the time when Roosevelt was to be retiring due to health reasons.

The man had a vice president that was not only loved by millions of Americans, he had massive support by the population in his fight against what he dubbed 'The American Fascist'. It turned out that the fascist Democratic party establishment sabotaged his nomination - as much as they would over and over again with anybody rocking their fascist boat.

Mueller is the enemy of the people. He has created an environment of deepest division and suspicion. Both are antagonistic to a true Democracy. But his paymasters are rubbing their hands behind luxury curtains. The American people have been successfully neutered and incapacitated. You might not be a 'Russian stooge' or whatever anymore, but any form of criticism of the present status quo will render you some sort of tool for whoever.

While it would take a proper crystal ball to predict the outcome of his distraction campaign, one thing can be easily deducted. The American electorate is at a complete loss in regards to the real objective here - a bi-partisan objective to never allow the population to see the truth again.

Barovsky , Jul 25 2019 15:31 utc | 122

Posted by: nottheonly1 | Jul 25 2019 15:24 utc | 121

Re Mueller: What do you expect? What do you expect from ANY if these gangsters, opportunists and mass murderers? I'm constantly amazed that otherwise rational people entertain the idea that any of these corrupt time servers can be anything other than what they are! Creatures of Empire, whose lives are totally bound up with SERVING Empire!

[Jul 25, 2019] Mueller looked senile and unaware and incompetent!

Jul 25, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

PleaseBeleafMe , Jul 25 2019 13:36 utc | 112

My response to the Mueller "chat" is how incredibly unprepared he seemed to be! The questions he was to answer were either obvious or ones any dependable lackey should of prepared him for.
He looked senile and unaware and incompetent! I was really taken back as it seemed to be a serious "fuck you" to thinking people or incredible laziness on the part of the wannabe established narrative.
Were the restrictions on what he could talk about a blessing? Seems to me the gotcha questions were restricted but still I was kinda impressed by the overall questioning.
I always wondered why trump seemed such a wuss on defending himself based upon the evidence he could of used to support himself!
Could it be that he was preparing for 2020 all along and that an actual long game mentality might prove the difference in another trump victory?

jawbone , Jul 25 2019 16:56 utc | 125

I could not watch all the time yesterday, but what struck me as soon as Mueller began speaking about any extemporaneous topics, even some seemingly simple yes/no or prepared responses, was that he seemed unable to speak smoothly and directly. He appeared to me he was searching for words, unable to easily put his replies into phrasing or sentences. Not stuttering, but close to it. At a loss for words, yes.

Was he extremely tired? Showing signs of Alzheimer's or other speech problems which can show up in old age? Did he have some kind of illness affecting his speech?

Later in the day, he had one reply to a Repub questioner, iirc, where he seemed more like the Mueller I had previously seen/heard.

Any thoughts?

[Jul 25, 2019] Joseph Mifsud was a key player in the game, but always portrayed as a russian asset

Jul 25, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

james , Jul 25 2019 3:05 utc | 72

thanks b... anything to discredit this pile of innuendo is fine by me - especially if mueller is being exposed for the gofer he is..

Joseph Mifsud was a key player in the game, but always portrayed as a russian asset.. disobedient media did good work covering mifsuds connections to m16-cia.. no wonder mueller didn't feel a need to talk with him.. he was one of their assets..

another curious character is felix sater. Felix Sater, Trump Associate, Skips House Hearing and Now Faces a Subpoena

but regardless of the desire to throw the wool over the publics eyes, what is really shocking is the dismal role of the democrat party in the usa as a party in opposition.. trump is being given another win by these folks... you find the worst person to lead the country - trump, and then you get an even worse opposition party - the democrats - and you have another 4 years of trump! but, if you are lucky the democrats will figure out to drop the impeachment concept when trump gets in for a 2nd term... that is not a sure thing!

@25 bevin.. i used to follow ew... she has driven so far over the cliff, there is no turning back for her... her comment section now is just plain awful...


snake , Jul 25 2019 4:23 utc | 73

Mueller proved one thing.. no one in any western government is going to improve one damn thing not from the inside, not from the outside.

... ... ...


kabobyak , Jul 25 2019 9:23 utc | 83
It was good to see congress members show some intelligence (and do intelligence work} in questioning Mueller. Congress, AG Barr, and IG Horowitz now have overwhelming evidence which could expose a lot of rot and possibly bring criminal charges to the highest ranks of the intelligence agencies and Obama administration. Question is, are they willing to go that far, or just serve as "controlled opposition" the way Trey Gowdy was with the Clinton email crimes. Repubs have been on the same MIC teat as Dems, and that may temper how far they go. Yesterday's questioning was encouraging though.

As others have said, the most stunning display of ignorance was Mueller's admission of not knowing who Fusion GPS or Glenn Simpson was. WTF!!?? and what has he been doing for over two years? With Mueller's obvious showing of ineptitude it's clear what his role has been from the start, serving as the "esteemed and beyond reproach, non-biased statesman" while the cabal on the committee set the agenda. NPR in their wisdom yesterday refuted any such idea, because as you know Mueller is a "Republican".

MSM reporting on this whole affair for the last three years is a joke; I'd put the score at 98% BS and 2% useful info (the 2% mostly from Fox--Tucker Carlson et al). The most incisive MSM reporting has come from Dan Bongino; I don't agree with some of his politics but with Russiagate/Spygate he is spot on. His podcast from yesterday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMKn3lgv6Bc

somebody , Jul 25 2019 10:06 utc | 87
Add to 92

Mueller's 'Pit Bull' Offered Ukrainian Oligarch A Sweet Deal To Provide Dirt On Trump"
In July 2017, Weissmann, who has been labeled Mueller's "pit bull" because of aggressive prosecutorial style, met with attorneys representing Dmitry Firtash, an energy magnate who was indicted on bribery charges in 2014, reports The Hill.

The story cites sources familiar with Weissmann's offer and defense memos written in meetings with the prosecutor.

One of the defense memos said that Weissmann claimed he could "resolve the Firtash case" by withdrawing charges against the oligarch, who has since been ordered extradited to the U.S. from Austria.

"The complete dropping of the proceedings was doubtless on the table," a Firtash defense memo reportedly says.

...

somebody , Jul 25 2019 10:24 utc | 88
add to 93

Victor Pinchuk, the Clintons & Endless Connections

and this

As Russia collusion fades, Ukrainian plot to help Clinton emerges

Ukraine would explain Russiagate, Christopher Steele, Skripal, MH17 ....

And for some reason the Epstein case explodes now, where noone can explain his system of foundation and where the money originally came from.

gpcus , Jul 25 2019 12:02 utc | 98
Yes, the hearing was a disaster for Democrats... and Republicans... and Americans... and even for Trump! But who cares? What is hugely damaging for almost everyone else is, instead, another lost opportunity to expose the emptiness of the Russian supposed meddling activities and the senseless Macchartist Russo-phobic climate following it, that has come out reinforced from the Muller testimony

[Jul 25, 2019] Robert Mueller Hearing A 'Disaster' For Democrats

Jul 25, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

Maracatu , Jul 24 2019 18:10 utc | 1

The Democrats wanted Robert Mueller to testify about his report on their favorite conspiracy theories, that Russia influenced the U.S. election and that Trump colluded with Russia in this.

Mueller had made clear that he did not want to testify and that all he had to say was already in his report. The Democrats insisted. But today's hearing went poorly as even their partisan followers admit:

Laurence Tribe @tribelaw - 18:30 UTC Jul 24, 2019

Much as I hate to say it, this morning's hearing was a disaster. Far from breathing life into his damning report, the tired Robert Mueller sucked the life out of it. The effort to save democracy and the rule of law from this lawless president has been set back, not advanced.

During the hearing multiple Democrats tried to get Mueller to support an impeachment of Trump. But Mueller never gave them that gift. The Democrats should thank him for that. An impeachment process against Trump is not popular :

A July Post-ABC poll found that 37 percent of Americans support Congress beginning impeachment proceedings, while 59 percent do not, with a 61 percent majority of Democrats backing proceedings.

It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics.

Mueller seemed to be not aware of many details of the investigation done under his name.

He said he knew nothing about GPS, the company hired by the Clinton campaign to contract with MI6 agent Christopher Steele to fabricate the 'dirty dossier'. There were lots of reports about GPS in the media and Mueller missed all of them?

He refused to answer why he did not indict Joseph Mifsud, a mysterious Maltese professor who planted the claim that 'Russia has dirt on Hillary Clinton' with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos later repeated that claim. The FBI then used that fact as the reason to launch its investigation against the Trump campaign. In his report Mueller claimed, without showing evidence, that Mifsud worked for Russia. That is unlikely and there is actual evidence that he worked with the British MI6.

Mifsud lied to the Mueller investigation. But unlike others witnesses who lied, Mueller never indicted him for making false statements. He punted on questions about this issue with multiple "Can't get into that."

He reacted similar when he was asked about Christopher Steele, the British agent who created and peddled the fake 'dirty dossier'.

There is still another Justice Department investigation ongoing that will look at the whole Russia affair from a different viewpoint. Was the FBI investigation into 'Russiagate' an illegal partisan effort to go after Trump? Who really initiate the whole 'Russiagate' campaign that seems to have been run by the British MI6? Was it John Brennan, Obama's CIA director, involved?

Little is known about that second investigation. It will hopefully come up with better evidence and results than the one Robert Mueller led. Somehow, I'm reminded of this article . They got what they wanted from the Mueller Report (not the Democrats, but the so-called "Deep State").


Sally Snyder , Jul 24 2019 18:22 utc | 2

Here are some very interesting comments from Vladimir Putin about Russia's role in the 2016 election and how the election was rigged for a Clinton victory:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2019/07/vladimir-putins-observations-on.html

As Mr. Putin states, the 2016 election was a clear case of the loser not wanting to admit defeat.

Russ , Jul 24 2019 18:27 utc | 3
Lots of Schadenfreude options with this.

"The effort to save democracy and the rule of law from this lawless president has been set back, not advanced."

What idiotic partisan drivel from the aptly named Lawrence Tribe . There's no real democracy and every president is lawless (as is every other US institution).

"During the hearing multiple Democrats tried to get Mueller to support an impeachment of Trump."

Maybe they should try getting their own Speaker to support it. It's the only possible theater they have left.

"It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics."

Why would they do that? By any objective or historical measure the Democrats are a far-right party. Oldest bourgeois political party on Earth.

paul , Jul 24 2019 18:32 utc | 4
the lasting impact of Russiagate will be on free speech
karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 18:35 utc | 5
Laurence Tribe's "lawless president" was Obama, not Trump. In a great many ways, Obama is/was worse than Trump, which ought to be expected--Obama's CIA, Trump's merely an Apprentice. Mueller fashioned a cover up and is fortunate to escape. There're still many crimes to investigate and arrests to be made, but those are mostly on Tribe's side.
vk , Jul 24 2019 18:45 utc | 6
Looks like the NYT has finally given up Russiagate:

It's Time to Move On From Robert Mueller

juannie , Jul 24 2019 18:48 utc | 7
Russ #3. You took the words right out of my keypad Russ, starting with your first "quote" and ending with your last "quote". The only difference is you said it much better and more succinctly than I.
bjd , Jul 24 2019 18:53 utc | 8
Brennan no matter how you toss, turn, stretch, fold or slant it.
Brennan (and a small côterie around him) tried a 'lever-grab' when Trump won.
It got out of hand when the MSM ran away with it and Brennan was ex.
The only way to control this narrative was for Brennan remain in charge of it.
Hence his pundit role on CIA Network News.
It ain't rocket science.


karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 18:54 utc | 9
curious man #4--

Shades of the Sirhan-Sirhan frame-up it would seem. You don't go to a crowded nightclub, get out on the dance floor and kill yourself; instead, you'd shoot up the club then kill yourself or allow the cops to do the deed. The Clinton Crime Family strikes again!

karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 19:08 utc | 10
The aim is now to get Trump on obstruction of justice. However, it's highly possible that Obama will get hit with that charge first for obstructing the investigation and charging of Hillary Clinton for the many crimes she committed. Then there are also Obama's crimes, too. But does Trump have the balls required? We shall see.
Clueless Joe , Jul 24 2019 19:10 utc | 11
"It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics."
Depends. Do you want them to talk about real progressive, as in leftist and anti-capitalist, politics, or about fake "progressive" politics, as in the SJW pet-peeve of the day?
Jeffrey Kaye , Jul 24 2019 19:14 utc | 12
"It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics."

b, you of all people should know that the Democratic Party is not interested as an institution in progressive politics. There seems to be a few who hang out with the Dems who are. They are flogging a dead horse. We need a new party that will really fight for the working people, and mobilize for change, not just for elections.

farm ecologist , Jul 24 2019 19:26 utc | 13
OT OT OT

Iranian source says IAEA chief assassinated

The chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Yukiya Amano, recently passed away and now there are claims that he was actually assassinated by Israel and the US for refusing to give in to raise new allegations against Iran's nuclear program. It appears that he was not in the best of health and therefore was planning to step down early, but on the other hand there appears to be no depth to which the accused parties will not sink.

Does anybody have further info on this?

http://www.china.org.cn/world/2019-07/24/content_75028198.htm

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2019/07/24/2060907/sources-raise-possibility-of-israeli-assassination-of-amano


GeorgeV , Jul 24 2019 19:30 utc | 14
Anyone who has doubted that the so-called Russia-gate scandal was nothing nothing but a fraud ginned-up by the Democrats, specifically by the Clinton wing of the party from day one, must be hopelessly stupid. Donald Trump's election to the Presidency, was in fact, the product of a gerrymandered House of Representatives, that gave individual congressional districts to the GOP, which in turn, assured Trump's election by the Electoral College, regardless of how the popular vote went. That is the reason why Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 presidential election, in addition to her being a lousy and arrogant campaigner.
lysias , Jul 24 2019 19:54 utc | 15
The gerrymandering of the House of Representatives is deplorable, but it did not affect the Electoral College vote in 2016. How many votes a state gets in the Electoral College depends on its population as determined by the census.
TG , Jul 24 2019 19:56 utc | 16
"It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics."

Hahahaha! Stop, you're killing me! ROTFL!

Thirdeye , Jul 24 2019 19:56 utc | 17
"It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics."

Don't hold your breath.

Harry Law , Jul 24 2019 19:57 utc | 18
karlof1@13. Trump... "I don't want to hurt them," he said, referring to the Clintons. "They're good people."
karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 20:02 utc | 19
farm ecologist @17--

I rather doubt he was murdered; his health was in decline; he planned to retire soon; and he was not at the recent closed-door meeting called by the Outlaw US Empire. As I wrote yesterday, the two most avid candidates for his replacement are an Argentinian and a Romanian, whose degree of independence must be questioned as was Amano's initially. As I cited Zarif as saying, his replacement must be as great an advocate of JCPOA as he was.

bevin , Jul 24 2019 20:03 utc | 20
Among the incidental damage of this farcical reprise of McCarthyite history was Emptywheel-Marci Wheeler, who must have known better but evidently believed that the Democrats would win this one and be distributing spoils galore.
A pity because, in her time, before 2016 Marci did much constructive work, now all wasted away. Most of the partisan Democrats who have felt obliged to pay lip service to this nonsense-including Bernie who must have known better- have damaged their credibility significantly. And they didn't have an abundance of credibility to draw on.
So we can expect the stupidity to continue: too many people have too much political capital invested in Russiagate not to keep selling this combination of a mirage and Brooklyn Bridge to the fan club.
I'm beginning to think that Julian Assange won't be extradited for the same reason as the Internet Research Agency of St Petersburg is not being charged: even the corrupt US court system cannot completely guarantee that Julian will not say something very interesting about the matter. And come up with irrefutable proof that it is true.
karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 20:09 utc | 21
Harry Law @23--

Yeah, deplorable ain't it? But he hates Obama, who certainly obstructed justice. As I opined a few days ago, Trump probably told Pelosi that if impeachment proceedings against him were to go forward then he'd go after Obama, which is why Pelosi again said impeachment's off the table.

As for what some see as a related topic, to get beyond Epstein, the sealed financial records must be unsealed cause that's where all the goodies are hidden--follow the money, don'tcha know!

karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 20:17 utc | 22
For those who challenged b's assertion that the Ds would start talking about Progressive politics, he's correct as they already have/are--attacking Progressive politicians and the policies they champion. From yesterday :

"'It's as Bad as It Looks': Pelosi Under Fire for Debt Ceiling Deal That Hands GOP Power to Kneecap Progressive Agenda

"'It sets up a crisis of the first year of the next president's administration,' said a former congressional staffer. 'We're letting them light the fuse on another bomb and place it squarely in the middle of the next president's first year.'"

Quite similar to what Obama did to Trump at the executive.

Peter D , Jul 24 2019 20:18 utc | 23
The whole Russiagate thing started two days after the DNC found out it had lost its emails. Losing the emails meant the world would know that the primary was rigged, and that the DNC, with media assistance, intentionally lined Trump up as an easy-to-beat GOP candidate. This would be very very bad for them all, and for the USA. The future could have been a scene of the Democrat candidate being hauled away in cuffs mid way through the election campaign.

Fox reporter says Assange told her privately to tell Seth Rich's parents that Seth did the leak. The timeline fits that Mifsud, and then Alexander Downer, did what they did upon request, implicating Paps in a Russia scandal all the way on the other side of the pond (read somewhere that Paps doesn't even recall mentioning the Russian dirt thing to Downer), so that it wasn't so obvious that the need for the whole Russiagate campaign originated entirely from the DNC email leak.

ben , Jul 24 2019 20:29 utc | 24
This so-called "report" can be described in one word; Obfuscation..
EtTuBrute , Jul 24 2019 20:32 utc | 25
I think he was just playing dumb as soon as they asked him anything implicating MI6, the Clintons or the FBI. His answers for the Dems were pretty short and sweet, anytime he was asked anything tricky he mumbled and fuddled to obfuscate the truth, if he actually answered at all.
ben , Jul 24 2019 20:33 utc | 26
Russ @ 3 said; "It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics."

No doubt, but don't hold your breath. The un-named party of big $, has captured most of the D's and R's AND WILL PREVAIL..

flankerbandit , Jul 24 2019 20:41 utc | 27
PCR posits that Trump needs to go after the crminals, in what he calls,
...the most massive conspiracy in American history, the intent of which was a coup against the elected president of the United States...

He says that Chavez' fatal mistake was 'moving on' instead of going after the gang behind the 2002 coup attempt [ie the powerful Venezuelan oligarchy].

Muduro is repeating Chavez's mistake. The CIA puppet who declared himself President of Venezuela and participated overtly with Washington in a coup attempt against Maduro has been given a free pass by Maduro, who has "moved on."

Politicians who are so stupid as to allow extreme criminal actions against democracy to go unpunished destroy democracy and bring about their own overthrow. Will Trump be one of them?


ben , Jul 24 2019 20:49 utc | 28
" ...the most massive conspiracy in American history, the intent of which was a coup against the elected president of the United States..."

Now that's garbage..

The REAL garbage was, and is, blaming Russia instead of the bought, and paid for corporate Dems, like HRC, and Obama..

ben , Jul 24 2019 20:54 utc | 29
P.S.- You can add Pelosi and Schumer to that list, and many more, who worship at the feet of the uber-wealthy, instead of serving the public interest. All these and more, including DJT, are the real problem..
karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 20:57 utc | 30
ben @34--

PCR is wrong about it being "the most massive conspiracy in American history." I would posit that the attempt to implement the #1 policy goal of Full Spectrum Dominance is THE most massive conspiracy--historic and ongoing--as it involves almost the entire Federal government and the armed forces just for starters. Blaming Russia is part of that policy goal.

GeorgeV , Jul 24 2019 20:59 utc | 31
To Lysias: Please read or reread a 9th grade high school civics book. Each US House congressional district is allotted one elector to the Electoral College. Each congressional district in each state is determined by that states' legislature. If that legislature is controlled by a particular political party, (Democrat, GOP etc.) then the makeup of that state's congressional borders will reflect the majority party's wishes on who goes to the Electoral College as an elector. Thus the gerrymandering. Remember, it is for better or worse, the Electoral College that actually selects who will be President, not the popular vote. Usually, most electors will reflect the voters of their district. But there have been rare exceptions. The US of A is not a pure democracy, but a limited one.
ben , Jul 24 2019 21:04 utc | 32
karlof @ 36; Agreed, but, this whole ball of wax is about massive corporate profits, and those sycophants who enable the process of killing for profits, around the globe...
That's what the 4th Reich does..
Jackrabbit , Jul 24 2019 21:04 utc | 33
b:

"It is high time for the Democrats to finally bury that nonsense and to start talking about progressive politics."

I completely agree with previous comments making the point that the Democratic Party, as an establishment institution, derails progressive change.

b supported Sanders in 2016. Apparently, he still hasn't caught on to the ruse.

"Democracy" as we understand that term is dead. Does anyone really believe that the Hillary vs. Trump choice arose from a 'democratic' process? Is Theresa May and Boris Johnson's selection to lead Britian 'democratic'? What about two consecutive rounds of Jewish Presidents and Prime Ministers in Ukraine? Is that a true 'democratic' choice?

Representative democracy has been compromised by money. The best alternative is direct democracy, which is a key demand of the Yellow Vest protestors .

=
Was the FBI investigation into 'Russiagate' an illegal partisan effort to go after Trump?

No. Russiagate was means for the Deep State to initiate a new McCarthyism. It had virtually no effect on the 2016 election.

=
Who really initiate the whole 'Russiagate' campaign that seems to have been run by the British MI6? Was it John Brennan, Obama's CIA director, involved?

I think it's pretty clear that CIA uses MI6 for US domestic 'ops'. I doubt MI6 would be 'meddling' in US Presidential elections without CIA approval. And Gina Haspel was in UK during this time.

I've voiced my deep suspicions about the 2016 Presidential election for well over a year, and specifically about Brennan (as a ring-leader) on April 20th 2019 :

Brennan on trial

Did he order the new McCarthyism (aka "Code Red") which included electing Trump as President, setting up Wikileaks to be smeared as a foreign agent, and settling scores with Michael Flynn?

Acting on 'Deep State' approval from the likes of Clinton, McCain, Mueller, Bush Sr., et al.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

The public is being led to believe that some bad apples in FBI/CIA were trying to elect Hillary and then unseat President Trump. That makes no sense for many reasons but chief among them is that Trump has not been bad for the establishment that pretends to hate him.

What makes much more sense is that Trump was meant to win. There wouldn't have been a Russiagate without a Trump win and Kissinger was calling for something like MAGA in 2014 to meet the challenge from Russia and China. Plus Hillary lost/threw the election by taking steps that no seasoned politician would have, like alienating key voter groups and refusing to campaign in the 3 mid-Western states that SHE KNEW would decide the election (her running mate grew up in the mid-West!)

Pft , Jul 24 2019 21:48 utc | 44
Mueller's stumbling, fumbling, confused performance serves to discredit his report. Thats a win for Democrats. Of course he wouldn't support impeachment publicly as he was hired to cover it up. Nobody does cover ups better than Mueller. Doesn't know who GPS is? LOL. No indictments for Steele and Mifsud. More LOL

With the author of the report that supposedly absolved Trump discredited, the report is no longer credible. Impeachment is the only way to get answers. But Dems and the deep State Media don't want impeachment despite their public rhetoric. Its all fake wrestling. Trumps the man the elite have chosen. They follow the orders of their masters who wish them to to make ineffective noises against Trump to serve the illusion we have a 2 party Democracy

So instead of emphasizing how Mueller discredited himself as a justification for impeachment they muddle the water with articles pointing to their defeat because Mueller didn't hand them anything on a silver platter (impeachment) besides his own apparent incompetence, they wave the white flag of defeat. LOL, IQ's are plummeting like a Boeing 737Max. There is nothing people wont believe.

karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 22:07 utc | 45
John Merryman @47--

You opine: "Progressive politics is irrelevant." Then you endorse a Progressive Political Policy Goal: "the public banking initiative".

The Populist Progressive Movement of the late 19th Century championed Public Banks as opposed to Private Banks and pushed for them to be implemented on a national scale. The all too numerous business cycle and financial crashes from 1876 to 1912 finally pushed Conservatives into forming a hybrid they could control which became the Federal Reserve. Its 106 year history shows that it's extremely imperfect and has caused great harm to the majority of the US citizenry. IMO, it would be best to terminate the Fed and replace it with what the Populists originally proposed--a nationwide system of public banks dedicated to serving the public interest while working with the US Treasury to manage the nation's coin and currency. Private banks could still exist; but with the Fed's elimination, their special privileges would disappear and they'd be forced to compete in a fair market with public banks. Here's the main national advocate group's website to establish a system of public banks while allowing the Fed to remain.

John Merryman , Jul 24 2019 22:27 utc | 47 karlof1 , Jul 24 2019 22:28 utc | 48
51 Cont'd--

Oops, I see we linked to the same site. What follows is the relevant portion of the National People's Party Platform also known as the Omaha Platform adopted in 1892:

"FINANCE. -- We demand a national currency, safe, sound, and flexible, issued by the general government only, a full legal tender for all debts, public and private, and that without the use of banking corporations, a just, equitable, and efficient means of distribution direct to the people, at a tax not to exceed 2 per cent. per annum, to be provided as set forth in the sub-treasury plan of the Farmers' Alliance, or a better system; also by payments in discharge of its obligations for public improvements.

"1. We demand free and unlimited coinage of silver and gold at the present legal ratio of l6 to 1.

"2. We demand that the amount of circulating medium be speedily increased to not less than $50 per capita.

"3. We demand a graduated income tax.

"4. We believe that the money of the country should be kept as much as possible in the hands of the people, and hence we demand that all State and national revenues shall be limited to the necessary expenses of the government, economically and honestly administered.

"5. We demand that postal savings banks be established by the government for the safe deposit of the earnings of the people and to facilitate exchange."

I wonder what a delegate to that Convention would think of today's level of corruption and the utterly criminal mismanagement of the nation's/People's finances by those entrusted with that job.

Stephen Morrell , Jul 24 2019 23:35 utc | 58
An alternative inquiry might question Julian Assange and Craig Murray. And they really should question Cody Shearer, Sidney Blumenthal.and of course Christopher Steele. Sergei Skripal would likely have relevant information (if he could be found), along with his MI6 minder Pablo Miller (and Steele's MI6 mate and business partner)...
exiled off mainstree , Jul 25 2019 0:11 utc | 62
I notice that Karlof1 points out the goal of getting Trump on "obstruction of justice". Testimony indicating that "obstruction of justice" obtains even if no crime is involved indicates the total destruction of the rule of law under the yankee legal structure. This view makes the yankee system like a Duerrenmatt novel where they can charge any body who does not fully cooperate with the authorities with obstruction of justice even if they cannot charge them with any other crime. That results in a fascist structure that can imprison any body they choose to on trumped up charges. As for Mueller, his failure reveals the bankruptcy of the whole Russia theory. It was, however, a success for the power structure, since, as a result, Flynn, a sceptic on arming terrorists to act on behalf of the yankee regime, was eliminated as Trump's national security advisor and eventually replaced with Bolton, a war criminal and a threat to our survival.
Pam Ho , Jul 25 2019 0:11 utc | 63
Today besides Dems creating drama for future campaign ads, we were all amused by Keyser M̶u̶e̶l̶l̶e̶r̶ Söze putting on his best Sgt. Schultz act "I know nothing, I see nothing."

Mike Whitney wrote about the outcome of this being a dud a few months ago: Tit For Tat? Why Did Mueller Let Trump Off the Hook? . Whitney said that Russiagate was all about containing Trump's foreign policy agenda, to try to force him to go along with the Blob--and when Trump started to do that, that is when Mueller "finished" and found "nothing to see here folks" when he could have dragged it on for years.

I also wrote about that idea 2 years ago, also saying that Russiagate was all about forcing Trump to change his foreign policy goals through impeachment threats. I used to think it was the Saudis behind egging the Dems on towards impeachment as a way to pressure Trump into going along with their agenda for the Middle East,i.e., letting Trump's people know they could bribe enough people to get the Russiagate dog and pony show to go away if Trump wouldn't leave Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yemen, and also attack Iran, at least financially. I wrote how they tried to get Obama to do their bidding but he wouldn't capitulate fully in Syria, and that is why the Saudis and Netanyahu hated on Obama so fiercely.

Now I am not so sure if the Saudis and Netanyahu were behind it, it could be coming from the foreign policy establishment, not just Americans but also Russian oligarchs on the outs with Putin, also oligarchs from the UK and Europe, Ukraine, Georgia, etc. and mostly all about containing Russia economically and geopolitically. Or I could be right and it is about the Middle East. My idea was that the impeachment talk by the Dems would end if Trump did what MbS and Netanyahu want him to do. How do we know which is correct? If Trump starts a war with Iran and impeachment talk ends, then I was right because the foreign policy establishment does not want a war with Iran. We know that because recently various major domos of the establishment and oligarchs like Soros and Koch have been trying to talk Trump out of a military conflict with Iran.

lysias , Jul 25 2019 0:15 utc | 64
The hearings made it clear that Mueller did not write the report. His staff did, and he just rubber-stamped it. His recollection of what was in the report was so defective that I suspect he hadn't even read the whole thing.

[Jul 24, 2019] Robert Mueller literally just said he wasn t familiar with Fusion GPS

Looks like Mueller currently is not capable of programming his microwave, never mind to write a report or supervise an investigation.
Jul 24, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

My Lord. My Lord. Drug test everyone in Washington. Everyone!

Velocitor , 8 minutes ago link

He never heard of Fusion GPS!?!?? Whaaaa????

That would be like Archibald Cox saying he never heard of Watergate! Does Mueller have Alzheimer's? If he doesn't know that much, what's the point of even talking to him?

Dems should have adjourned right then, to save further embarrassment.

RictaviousPorkchop , 37 minutes ago link

After that performance Mueller should be on street corner begging for change.

[Jul 24, 2019] This frail old man proved to be unable to remember basic facts if his investigation and refused to answer basic questions about his final report...

CNN's Oliver Darcey tweeted "Seems pretty clear at this point that Mueller is not the best spokesperson for his own report."
Jul 24, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

"frail old man, unable to remember things, stumbling, refusing to answer basic questions...I said it in 2017 and Mueller confirmed it today," tweeted Moore, adding "All you pundits and moderates and lame Dems who told the public to put their faith in the esteemed Robert Mueller -- just STFU from now on."

[Jul 24, 2019] Watch Live Rep. Jim Jordan Jabs Mueller Over 'Lynchpin' Mifsud And Origins Of FBI Investigation

We're seeing the REAL corruption. Mueller's investigation was completely corrupt which hunt from day one!!
Mueller looks like a Deer in the Headlights, a confused and scared old man, and definitely does not know details of his own investigation. He was just a figurehead. Which makes me wonder who really was in charge of this investigation?!!! Muller is not smart enough to be Special counsel. He can't even remember what he signed. It was clear that Mueller doesn't know what his own report says.
Mueller was in on it from the beginning. His whole role was to get President Trump impeached, but he chicken out at the end and now he looks bad. Did you see the look he gave Nadler? That was the look of "Help Me, Please".
All members of Mueller team should be disbarred for, at a minimum.
Jul 24, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) Grills Robert Mueller over Joseph Mifsud - YouTube

Snitty Lizzy ✔ @StarChamberMaid

It's obvious that Mueller had very little to do with the report, so Trump's claims a bunch of crazed partisans conducted a witch hunt certainly seems more plausible.

Richard Kroll 51 minutes ago God Bless you Jim Jordan and the intelligent people of Ohio who elected you. You nailed Mueller cold. "We can't talk about this... 1000x...we can't talk about this." Why the hell NOT Mr. Mueller. Don WS4E 46 minutes ago Meuller: "I'm not going to get into anything that makes me looks bad" Blake Alsobrook 25 minutes ago Fuvking amazing. Mifsud is western intelligence. Bring the whole thing down. Nightflight 1 hour ago A costly dog &pony show. Nothing will come out of it.

Just Another Vietnam Vet , 3 minutes ago link

No investigation of the bogus fake Steele Dossier, no answering of any questions, avoidance of any real questions, no evidence.

2 years, 30 mil, 14 DIM prosecutors, unlimited resources, and zero Republicans.

NO CONCLUSION, NO CONSPIRACY, NO EVIDENCE, NO CHARGES.

Mueller is a biased blind stammering DIM puppet for the DIMS.

hugin-o-munin , 5 minutes ago link

Look at this old broken down bureaucrat investigator who clearly hates all of this. This is what a life of lies, deceptions and political games does to an individual. It removes a persons soul until there is nothing left but an empty shell. Sad

BowLogosWow , 5 minutes ago link

Mueller: I'm not going to comment = I plead the 5th. A man who has a lot to hide. Pathetic SOB.

Wouldn't it be a kick if we eventually find out that Misfud's source was a sweet nothing whispered in his ear by an Epstein Lolita?

Grumpy Old Objectivist , 9 minutes ago link

It's honestly amazing how reluctant he is to confirm his own words for a republican questioner, yet how breezy and carefree he is with rank speculation when team jackass has the microphone. This guy is the worst kind of criminal.

Respect_The_Cock , 11 minutes ago link

In Major Blow To Mueller, Federal Judge Rebukes Mueller And DOJ For Falsely Claiming 'Russian Bot Farm' Linked To Russian Government

https://www.headlineoftheday.com/2019/07/10/in-major-blow-to-mueller-federal-judge-rebukes-mueller-and-doj-for-falsely-claiming-russian-bot-farm-linked-to-russian-government/

FBI's entrapment of Gen. Flynn was despicable

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/fbis-entrapment-of-general-flynn-was-despicable

Trump Tower meeting: A shining example of what not to investigate

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/439817-trump-tower-meeting-a-shining-example-of-what-not-to-investigate

Respect_The_Cock , 10 minutes ago link

Mueller is not above the law.

18 U.S. Code § 2384.Seditious conspiracy

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

Totally_Disillusioned , 14 minutes ago link

Hiring practices? How about Weismann's career of prosecutorial abuses as noted by multiple courts not to mention all those Enron Anderson defendants who were wrongfully imprisioned by Weismann's withholding exculpatory evidence and eventually released and exonerated by the judicial system?

[Jul 24, 2019] Mueller lies and obfiscations are part of the bigger picture

Notable quotes:
"... Without putting too fine a point on it, the Mueller "report" is nothing but a tissue of lies, innuendo, and misinformation tantamount to fraud. ..."
"... What the Mueller "report" is, however, is a relatively crude effort to cover up the efforts of the "deep state" (FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, etc etc) to fix the 2016 election for their preferred candidate - Three Names. And that isn't just highly illegal, it's a violation of the oath that you take to uphold the constitution. They should be in jail and somebody should be investigating Seth Rich's murder. ..."
Jul 24, 2019 | www.thenation.com

Jeffrey Harrison says: July 23, 2019 at 9:01 pm

You have been very consistent Mr. Mate. I applaud you. Let me make a few observations. There are two things to consider. One is the allegations that resulted in Mueller's so-called investigation and two is the "investigation" itself.

As for the allegation of (a) Russian interference/"meddling" in the 2016, you have provided the ammunition that shoots the allegation full of holes. Timing after the election, minuscule budget compared to actors actually trying to influence the election, advertising content frequently having nothing to do with the election and, finally, a US district judge that pointed out that Mueller hadn't shown that the Russian government was behind the Internet Research Agency and ordered him to cease and desist. Everybody seems to go oh, well, that's alright at this point but it's not. The United States government seized Russian owned properties in the United States without compensation, it expelled Russian diplomats and pressed our vassal states to expel Russian diplomats, it expanded an economic war with Russia by increasing the sanctions that the US imposed on Russia for their successful resistance to the US coup in Ukraine as well as barring Russian citizens from obtaining visas to the US. If the US wants to play law-fare, plausibly the Russians should respond in kind. What we have done to Russia just for any part of this could easily be a tort in a US court. False claims that result in damages are actionable.

Then you have (b) the US claim that the dastardly forces of evil and/or wickedness (the GRU) broke into the DNC computers and stole all these e-mails which demonstrated what a bunch of b***ards the DNC were and released them to the world so that now everybody knew that the DNC was a corrupt and evil organization. More sanctions all around for Russia. Wait, what? Oh, right, the GRU. There were a number of us who were poking holes in the regime's narrative about the "hack" of DNC and now another federal judge has proof in front of him that, in fact, the murdered Seth Rich and his brother Aaron were the source of a thumb-drive with the e-mails. Oops. But the more sanctions all around on Russia are still in place without any justification. To make matters worse, I read on Reuters that FBI director Wray is claiming that the Russians are going to interfere in the 2020 elections. Has anybody read the story of the little boy who cried wolf? They interfered in the 2016 election....ah, no, they didn't....They were going to interfere in the elections of our European vassals....ah, no, they didn't.

Without putting too fine a point on it, the Mueller "report" is nothing but a tissue of lies, innuendo, and misinformation tantamount to fraud. It probably isn't worth the match to set it on fire (at least with Ken Starr we got something so salacious that we could skip the Playboy).

What the Mueller "report" is, however, is a relatively crude effort to cover up the efforts of the "deep state" (FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, etc etc) to fix the 2016 election for their preferred candidate - Three Names. And that isn't just highly illegal, it's a violation of the oath that you take to uphold the constitution. They should be in jail and somebody should be investigating Seth Rich's murder.

Jeffrey Harrison says: July 23, 2019 at 11:46 pm

Oh, and by the way. The US chose to violate the Russian embassy facilities at least as flagrantly as the Iranian teenagers did in Tehran but without the excuse of youthful exuberance.

[Jul 23, 2019] These Questions For Mueller Show Why Russiagate Was Never The Answer

Notable quotes:
"... 20 Crucial Questions Ahead of Mueller Testimony https://youtu.be/X2WZpm1GJzE ..."
"... I still wonder how Barr forced Mueller to conclude his circus. The officially trotted out letters are not simply enough to stop Mueller; remember, this is the man who arrested Flynn but not Podesta. There must be some good ammunition that Barr has got hold of that terrified Mueller to stop his "investigations" even though he knew this will anger the Deep State. ..."
"... Dirty-cop Mueller Rigged Grand Juries For Decades: https://aim4truth.org/2019/05/01/mueller-rigged-grand-juries-for-decades/ ..."
"... Dirty-Cop Mueller Failed to Provide Evidence That DNC Was Hacked https://youtu.be/lKGn1zSL-OU ..."
"... And to add insult to injury, breaking just a couple of hours ago. John Solomon of The Hill says DOJ met with Misfud attorneys and have told Durham, he was hired by Western Intelligence (FBI, CIA) to approach Popadapolus on their behalf, NOT ON BEHALF OF THE RUSSIANS. ..."
"... In other words... The origins of the investigation is a lie. The Mueller probe should never have even started as there was ZERO probable cause. ..."
"... At this point, the Obama DOJ / FBI / State Dept have broken dozens of laws to cover up the fact that they were spying on EVERYONE, not just the Trump team... The resistance is so great, that they have made themselves into a parody... When everything gets declassified, none of these people will be able to walk the street... ..."
"... 8. Why didn't you interview Veselnitskya, or review all documents related to her expedited approval for entering the country by Lorenta Lynch and your prosecution team member Preet Bhrara ? ..."
"... Those 'Trump officials' were only 'Trump officials' for appearances. Manafort, for instance, was a plant. And Trump knew he was a plant; Manafort was entered into the Trump campaign under a contrived circumstance. ..."
"... Well I don't expect anything to change. The Republicans won't ask the right questions and the Democrats will spend their time spewing immaterial "bad things" about Trump to influence public perception because they have nothing of substance. All they can hope for is to discredit him enough in the court of public opinion. ..."
Jul 23, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Aaron Maté via TheNation.com,

The former special counsel still has a lot he can clarify...

"For two years, Democrats have waited on Robert Mueller to deliver a death blow to the Trump presidency," The New York Times observed on July 20 .

"On Wednesday, in back-to-back hearings with the former special counsel, that wish could face its final make-or-break moment."

The very fact that Democrats had to subpoena Mueller in order to create this final moment should in fact be the final reminder of what a mistake it was for Democrats to have waited on him. If Mueller had incriminating information yet to share, or had been stymied from doing his work, or if Attorney General William Barr had somehow misrepresented his findings, then it stands to reason that Mueller would be welcoming the opportunity to appear before Congress, not resisting it. The reality is that Mueller's investigation did not indict a single person for collusion with Russia, or even for anything related to the 2016 election. Mueller's report found no evidence of a Trump-Russia conspiracy, and even undermined the case for it .

That said, there are unresolved matters that Mueller's testimony could help clarify. Mueller claimed to have established that the Russian government conducted "a sweeping and systematic" interference campaign in order to elect Trump, yet the contents of his report don't support that allegation. The Mueller report repeatedly excludes countervailing information in order to suggest, misleadingly, that the Trump campaign had suspect "links" and "ties" to people connected with Russia. And Mueller and other intelligence officials involved in the Russia probe made questionable investigative decisions that are worthy of scrutiny. To address these issues, here are some questions that Mueller could be asked.

I should note that missing from my list is anything related to obstruction. This topic will surely dominate Democrats' line of questioning, but I view it as secondary and more appropriate for a law school seminar. The core issue of the Mueller investigation is alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election and the Trump campaign's potential coordination with it. The obstruction issue only began to dominate after it was clear that Mueller had found no such conspiracy. Although the report does show examples of Trump's stated intent to impede the Mueller investigation, the probe itself was unhindered.

There is also the fact that Mueller himself declined to make a call on obstruction, and even presented arguments that could be used to refute it. The obstruction section of the report notes that Trump was not "involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference." Although not dispositive, Mueller says that "the absence of that evidence affects the analysis of the President's intent and requires consideration of other possible motives for his conduct." In a joint statement with Barr , Mueller also made clear that "he was not saying that, but for the [Office of Legal Counsel] opinion, he would have found the President obstructed justice." Accordingly, I see no reason why Congressional Democrats are so confident that Mueller found otherwise.

1. Why did you suggest that juvenile clickbait from a Russian troll farm was part of a "sweeping and systematic" Russian government interference effort?

The Mueller report begins by declaring that "[t]he Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion." A few paragraphs later, Mueller tells us that Russian interference occurred "principally through two operations." The first of these operations was "a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton," carried out by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency (IRA).

The inference here is that the IRA was a part of the Russian government's "sweeping and systematic" interference campaign. Yet Mueller's team has been forced to admit in court that this was a false insinuation. Earlier this month, a federal judge rebuked Mueller and the Justice Department for having "improperly suggested a link" between IRA and the Kremlin. U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich noted that Mueller's February 2018 indictment of the IRA " does not link the [IRA] to the Russian government " and alleges "only private conduct by private actors." Jonathan Kravis, a senior prosecutor on the Mueller team, acknowledged that this is the case. "[T]he report itself does not state anywhere that the Russian government was behind the Internet Research Agency activity," Kravis told the court.

Kravis is correct. The Mueller report did not state that the Kremlin was behind the social media campaign; it only disingenuously suggested it. Mueller also goes to great lengths to paint it as a sophisticated operation that "had the ability to reach millions of U.S. persons." Yet, as we already know , most of the Russian social media content was juvenile clickbait that had nothing to do with the election (only 7 percent of IRA's Facebook posts mentioned either Trump or Clinton). There is also no evidence that the political content reached a mass audience, and to the extent it reached anyone, most of it occurred after the election.

2. Are you still convinced that the GRU stole Democratic Party emails and transferred them to Wikileaks?

Between the initial July 2018 indictment of 12 GRU officers for the DNC email theft and Mueller's March 2019 report, some wiggle room appears. As I wrote this month for RealClearInvestigations , Mueller's report uses qualified, vague language to describe the alleged GRU theft of Democratic Party emails, offers an implausible timeline for when Wikileaks may have received the emails from the GRU, and acknowledges that Mueller has not actually established how WikiLeaks acquired the stolen information.

3. Why didn't you interview Julian Assange?

The uncertainty in Mueller's account of how WikiLeaks received the stolen emails could possibly have been cleared up had Mueller attempted to interview Julian Assange. The WikiLeaks founder insists that the Russian government was not his source, and has repeatedly offered to speak to US investigators. Given that Assange received and published the stolen emails at the heart of Mueller's investigation, his absence from Mueller's voluminous witness sheet is a glaring omission.

4. Why did you imply that key figures were Russian agents, and leave out countervailing information, including their (more) extensive Western ties?

In the report, Mueller goes to great lengths to insinuate -- without directly asserting -- that two key figures in the Trump-Russia affair, Konstanin Kilimnik and Joseph Mifsud, acted as Kremlin agents or intermediaries. In the process, he omits or minimizes extensive evidence that casts doubt on their supposed Russia connections or makes clear their far more extensive Western ties. Mueller ignores the fact that the State Department described Kilimnik as a "sensitive source" who was regularly supplying inside information on Ukrainian politics. And Mueller emphasizes that Mifsud "had connections to Russia" and "maintained various Russian contacts," but doesn't ever mention that he has deep connections in Western intelligence and diplomatic circles .

Stephan Roh, a Swiss lawyer who has previously represented Mifsud, has maintained that Mifsud "is not a Russian spy but a Western intelligence co-operator." Whatever the case, it is puzzling that Mueller emphasized Mifsud's "connections to Russia" but ignored his connections to governments in the West. It's also baffling that none of this was clarified when the FBI interviewed Mifsud in February 2017 -- which raises a whole new question for Mueller.

5. Why did you indict several Trump officials for perjury, but not Joseph Mifsud?

Adding to the puzzle surrounding Mifsud is Mueller's revelation that Mifsud made false statements to FBI investigators when they interviewed him in February 2017. (Mifsud was in Washington, DC, for a conference sponsored by the State Department, yet one more Western "connection" that has gone overlooked). If Mifsud really was a Russian agent, then it was always a mystery why he was not arrested then, nor indicted since. And given that Mueller indicted others for lying to the FBI -- foremost George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn -- it is unclear why Mifsud was not.

6. Why did you omit the fact that Rob Goldstone's offer to Donald Jr. -- "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia" as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump" -- was "publicist puff" (in other words, a lie)?

Mueller devotes a 13-page section to the infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, where Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort met with Russian nationals after Trump Jr. was promised "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia." Mueller says that "the meeting showed that the Campaign anticipated receiving information from Russia that could assist candidate Trump's electoral prospects," but acknowledges that the Russians present "did not provide such information."

What Mueller conspicuously does not acknowledge is that the information "that the Campaign anticipated receiving from Russia" was in fact fictional, and not from Russia. The offer came from British music publicist Rob Goldstone, who was tasked with securing the meeting at the request of his Russian pop star client, Emin Agalarov. In an act of what he called "publicist puff," Goldstone said he about "Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump" that would later be widely described as "the smoking gun" for collusion.

Goldstone told me this week that he was disappointed that Mueller chose to omit that critical part of his testimony. "I told them that I had used my PR, puffed-up flourish in order to get Don Jr.'s attention," Goldstone said. Mueller's decision to exclude that, Goldstone added, is a "shame It would have been opportunity to have closure on that."

7. Did the Trump campaign receive any Russian government offers of assistance from anyone actually acting on behalf of the Russian government?

The Mueller report obscures the absence of contacts between Trump and Russian government intermediaries with ambiguous, suggestive assertions that the investigation "identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign," or "identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign."

But the cases of Konstantin Kilimnik, Joseph Mifsud, and Rob Goldstone underscore a rather inconvenient fact for proponents of the theory that the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government: There are zero documented cases of Trump officials interacting with actual Kremlin intermediaries making actual offers of assistance. The only Kremlin officials or representatives shown to interact with the Trump camp in any significant way before the election are the Russian ambassador having routine encounters and a Kremlin assistant who declined Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's request for assistance on the failed Trump Tower Moscow project.

8. Were US intelligence officials compromised by Russophobia?

Key US officials behind the Russia investigation have made no secret of their animus towards Russia. "I do always hate the Russians," Lisa Page, a senior FBI lawyer on the Russia probe, testified to Congress in July 2018. "It is my opinion that with respect to Western ideals and who it is and what it is we stand for as Americans, Russia poses the most dangerous threat to that way of life." As he opened the FBI's probe of the Trump campaign's ties to Russians in July 2016, FBI agent Peter Strzok texted Page : "fuck the cheating motherfucking Russians Bastards. I hate them I think they're probably the worst. Fucking conniving cheating savages." Speaking to NBC News in May 2017 , the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper explained why US officials saw interactions between the Trump camp and Russian nationals as a cause for alarm: "The Russians," Clapper said, "almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique. So we were concerned." In a May interview with Lawfare , former FBI General Counsel Jim Baker, who helped oversee the Russia probe, explained the origins of the investigation as follows: "It was about Russia, period, full stop When the [George] Papadopoulos information comes across our radar screen, it's coming across in the sense that we were always looking at Russia we've been thinking about Russia as a threat actor for decades and decades."

The fixation with Russia was so great that, as The New York Times revealed in January , on top of the FBI's initial probe in the summer of 2016, the bureau opened a second probe in May of 2017 over whether or not Trump himself was "working on behalf of Russia against American interests." TheNew York Times story makes no allusion to any evidence underlying the FBI's concern. Instead, we learn that FBI was "disquieted" by a "constellation of events," all public:

Mr. Trump had caught the attention of F.B.I. counterintelligence agents when he called on Russia during a campaign news conference in July 2016 to hack into the emails of his opponent, Hillary Clinton. Mr. Trump had refused to criticize Russia on the campaign trail, praising President Vladimir V. Putin. And investigators had watched with alarm as the Republican Party softened its convention platform on the Ukraine crisis in a way that seemed to benefit Russia.

This account is remarkable not just because it shows that the FBI opened up an extraordinary investigation of the president of the United States as agent of Russia based on their interpretation of public events. It also shows that their interpretation of those public events involved several errors -- Trump's July 2016 comment was a joke, and the story about the GOP platform change was overblown (and later undermined in practice when Trump sold the weapons to Ukraine , a move President Obama had opposed ).

The fact that so many key officials carry such xenophobic animus toward Russia - to the point where they felt compelled to act on erroneous interpretations of public events - raised legitimate questions about whether their personal biases influenced their professional decisions.

The same could be asked about the influential media and political voices who, despite the absent evidence and sheer absurdity of their conspiracy theory, elevated Russiagate as the dominant political issue of the Trump presidency. Whatever questions they may have left for Mueller, the now former special counsel and savior figure has made clear that he is not the answer.


LEEPERMAX , 11 minutes ago link

20 Crucial Questions Ahead of Mueller Testimony https://youtu.be/X2WZpm1GJzE

East Indian , 14 minutes ago link

And there is a bipartisan consensus that none of these questions will be asked.

Obamagate (not Russiagate) is about fooling the willing. Others are not convinced by this "report".

I still wonder how Barr forced Mueller to conclude his circus. The officially trotted out letters are not simply enough to stop Mueller; remember, this is the man who arrested Flynn but not Podesta. There must be some good ammunition that Barr has got hold of that terrified Mueller to stop his "investigations" even though he knew this will anger the Deep State.

LEEPERMAX , 14 minutes ago link

Dirty-cop Mueller Rigged Grand Juries For Decades: https://aim4truth.org/2019/05/01/mueller-rigged-grand-juries-for-decades/

HardlyZero , 15 minutes ago link

2. & 3. probably, his name is Seth Rich .

Mueller didn't want to go there since it would bring down the entire operation.

LEEPERMAX , 26 minutes ago link

Dirty-Cop Mueller Failed to Provide Evidence That DNC Was Hacked https://youtu.be/lKGn1zSL-OU

Southern_Patriot , 31 minutes ago link

And to add insult to injury, breaking just a couple of hours ago. John Solomon of The Hill says DOJ met with Misfud attorneys and have told Durham, he was hired by Western Intelligence (FBI, CIA) to approach Popadapolus on their behalf, NOT ON BEHALF OF THE RUSSIANS.

In other words... The origins of the investigation is a lie. The Mueller probe should never have even started as there was ZERO probable cause.

Keyser , 28 minutes ago link

At this point, the Obama DOJ / FBI / State Dept have broken dozens of laws to cover up the fact that they were spying on EVERYONE, not just the Trump team... The resistance is so great, that they have made themselves into a parody... When everything gets declassified, none of these people will be able to walk the street...

Respect_The_Cock , 31 minutes ago link

DefDog: Judge Slams Mueller for Lies & Misrepresentation and Lack of Evidence -- Should Robert Mueller be Indicted?

Separately we have pointed out that we consider Robert Mueller indictable for 3,000 counts of obstructing justice and complicity in murder after the fact for his role, as Director of the FBI, in obstructing proper investigation and actively covering up for **** Cheney and the Zionists who planned 9/11 from 1988 and then carried it out with **** Cheney managing the US Government to enable it to happen (and probably, with Donald Rumsfeld, faking the Pentagon attack that resulted in additional deaths).

See Especially:

Memoranda for the President on 9/11: Time for the Truth -- False Flag Deep State Truth! UPDATE 15: Dutch Web Site

See Also:

BLOCKBUSTER: Bill Binney with Dustin Nemos on Assange, DNC, Mueller, Pompeo, Corruption at NSA, Much More (36:24)

Eric Zuesse: Robert Mueller's Record of Framing Innocent People -- the Mueller Show (and No Mention of 9/11 Cover-Up)

Phantom Phixer: Donald Trump Vindicated – FBI Source Since 1981 [Also Connects Mueller to Trump and Barr in a Surprisingly Good Way]

Robert Steele with Angie Blake (1:26) Mueller Should Be Indicted for 9/11 Cover-Up

Robert Steele with Angie Blake: America 2.0 Update -- Open Source Intelligence, #UNRIG Election Reform, Pedophilia -- Terminating #GoogleGestapo -- Indictment of Clintons AND Robert Mueller

SGT REPORT (Video, 14:14) Mueller Report Fries Clintons and British, Julian Assange's Testimony Will Fry Everyone Else

Zero Hedge: Ambassador Craig Murray Guts Robert Mueller

Zero Hedge: Another Damning Indictment of Mueller Report

https://phibetaiota.net/2019/07/defdog-judge-slams-mueller-for-lies-misrepresentation-and-lack-of-evidence-should-robert-mueller-be-indicted/

LEEPERMAX , 33 minutes ago link

MUELLER'S TREASON NEEDS A SWIFT MILITARY SOLUTION

https://aim4truth.org/2019/07/23/muellers-treason-needs-a-swift-military-solution/

Prosource , 34 minutes ago link

8. Why didn't you interview Veselnitskya, or review all documents related to her expedited approval for entering the country by Lorenta Lynch and your prosecution team member Preet Bhrara ?

Richard Whitney , 38 minutes ago link

#5 is wrong. Those 'Trump officials' were only 'Trump officials' for appearances. Manafort, for instance, was a plant. And Trump knew he was a plant; Manafort was entered into the Trump campaign under a contrived circumstance.

Trump knew he was a plant and he used the Cuckoo's Egg strategy to not tip his hand that he was 'way ahead of the cabal. George Pap was the same thing. You can read about GP in the Mueller Report and see that the Trump campaign knew all along, and strung GP along. Halper was probably working the Trump side of the counterintelligence op, scoping out GP to find out GP's backing.

pixxa , 1 hour ago link

Well I don't expect anything to change. The Republicans won't ask the right questions and the Democrats will spend their time spewing immaterial "bad things" about Trump to influence public perception because they have nothing of substance. All they can hope for is to discredit him enough in the court of public opinion.

A wind is rising , 42 minutes ago link

precisely. Reflects my post above (altho it was put a half hour after yours)

A wind is rising , 43 minutes ago link

Mueller's questioning will be anything but a disaster for the Dems. The press will spin it all in their favor. At the end of the day tomorrow you will see that, contrary to anything that has to do with how the "law" works in the USA, the Trump admin is guilty of crimes untold, even if there is no evidentiary proof of that viewpoint.

Now if Mueller were on the other side of the aisle, the Dems would absolutely crucify him (and a hypothetical Dem president), like a murder of crows descending. Could the Repubs do that? No way.

navy62802 , 1 hour ago link

It was all a pile of **** from the start. The unfortunate part for the country is that none of the criminals who perpetrated this action will ever be held accountable. The US legal system is too corrupt to do so. they will all walk away free and clear. And that is doom for the Republic. Going forward, sentient US citizens will no longer trust their DOJ and FBI. And that is an untenable situation in a free republic.

Unknown User , 1 hour ago link

I am still hopeful that Barr understands that there is no way of sweeping this under the rug.

East Indian , 12 minutes ago link

Everybody understands there is no way to sweep this under; they will simply accept these are unpardonable crimes against American people, and then move on.

[Jul 23, 2019] Mueller will stick strictly to what his report concludes and, when pressed to go outside of that, will blame DOJ guidelines for preventing him from adding anything else to his testimony.

Notable quotes:
"... If Mueller says anything else he then exposes his initial report as a fraud. He already concluded, there was no collusion between the Trump team and the Russians. He will not do a 180 tomorrow and say there was. ..."
Jul 23, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Mueller asked for guidance. The DOJ letter from Assistant Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer :

I write in response to your July 10, 2019 letter concerning the testimonial subpoenas you received from the House Judiciary Committee (HJ C) and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI). Your letter requests that the Department provide you with guidance concerning privilege or other legal bars applicable to potential testimony in connection with those subpoenas.

What does the letter mean? Mueller will stick strictly to what his report concludes and, when pressed to go outside of that, will blame DOJ guidelines for preventing him from adding anything else to his testimony.

If Mueller says anything else he then exposes his initial report as a fraud. He already concluded, there was no collusion between the Trump team and the Russians. He will not do a 180 tomorrow and say there was.

Mueller did not indict on obstruction of justice. Mueller and Barr are both on the record that the decision was NOT repeat NOT because of the DOJ guideline against indicting a sitting President. I am sure you have heard several morons on TV state otherwise, but the fact on this point is clear. Notwithstanding those guidelines Mueller did not indict.

[Jul 23, 2019] Mueller's FBI 'Attack Dog' Weissmann Begged Ukrainian Oligarch For Dirt On Trump

Notable quotes:
"... Embarrassingly for the DOJ, a key document they submitted to Austria in support of Firtash's extradition allegedly from his corporate files and purportedly showing evidence that he sanctioned a bribery scheme in India was actually a slide from a powerpoint presentation created by the McKinsey consulting firm as part of a hypothetical presentation on ethics for the Boeing Corp. ..."
"... "Submitting a false and misleading document to a foreign sovereign and its courts for an extradition decision is not only unethical but also flouts the comity of trust necessary for that process where judicial systems rely only on documents to make that decision," Firtash's US legal team told Solomon. " DOJ's refusal to rescind the document after being specifically told it is false and misleading is an egregious violation of U.S. and international law. " ..."
Jul 23, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

As the FBI investigated whether Donald Trump was working with Russia, top bureau attorney Andrew Weissmann secretly approached a Ukrainian Oligarch's US attorneys seeking dirt on President Trump , according to The Hill 's John Solomon.

In exchange, the FBI was willing to drop an ongoing case against the Ukrainian - Dmitry Firtash , who was hit with 2014 corruption charges in Chicago alleging that he engaged in corruption and bribery in India linked to a US aerospace deal.

According to a defense memo recounting Weissmann's contacts, the prosecutor claimed the Mueller team could "resolve the Firtash case" in Chicago and neither the DOJ nor the Chicago U.S. Attorney's Office "could interfere with or prevent a solution," including withdrawing all charges. "The complete dropping of the proceedings was doubtless on the table," according to the defense memo. - The Hill

Dmitry Firtash at the supreme court in Vienna on June 25

It was a desperate move for the FBI - which was grappling with a lack of evidence against Trump as the Steele dossier was turning out to be an embarrassing dud (" There's no big there there ," lead FBI agent Pete Strzok texted a few days before Weissmann's overture, writes Solomon).

At the same time, the DOJ's evidence against Firtash in the 2014 case was also falling apart.

Two central witnesses were in the process of recanting testimony , and a document the FBI portrayed as bribery evidence inside Firtash's company was exposed as a hypothetical slide from an American consultant's PowerPoint presentation, according to court records I reviewed. - The Hill

In short, the DOJ had two high profile cases which were unraveling as Weissmann reached out.

Two weeks before the offer was made, Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel - tasked with continuing and expanding upon the FBI's substantial investigative efforts (including espionage) against Donald Trump and anyone in his orbit.

Firtash's legal team thought Weissman was probably overstepping his authority, as the special counsel's office was still subject to DOJ oversight. They were also taken aback after Weissmann went to extraordinary lengths to enlist the Ukrainian by sharing prosecutorial theories the FBI was forming about Trump and his team.

Prosecutors in plea deals typically ask a defendant for a written proffer of what they can provide in testimony and identify the general topics that might interest them. But Weissmann appeared to go much further in a July 7, 2017, meeting with Firtash's American lawyers and FBI agents , sharing certain private theories of the nascent special counsel's investigation into Trump, his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Russia, according to defense memos.

For example, Firtash's legal team wrote that Weissmann told them he believed a company called Bayrock, tied to former FBI informant Felix Sater, had "made substantial investments with Donald Trump's companies" and that prosecutors were looking for dirt on Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner .

Weissmann told the Firtash team " he believes that Manafort and his people substantially coordinated their activities with Russians in order to win their work in Ukraine, " according to the defense memos. And the Mueller deputy said he "believed" a Ukrainian group tied to Manafort "was merely a front for illegal criminal activities in Ukraine," and suggested a "Russian secret service authority" may have been involved in influencing the 2016 U.S. election , the defense memos show. - The Hill

Despite being 'holed up' in Austria for five years while fighting extradition charges to the US, Firtash turned down Weissmann's plea overtures. His lawyers told John Solomon that he rejected the deal because he didn't have credible information or evidence against Trump, Manafort, or anyone else Weissmann laid out in his theories.

In sealed Austrian court filings earlier this month, Firtash's attorneys compared the DOJ's 13-year investigation to medieval inquisitions, citing Weissman's approach as politically motivated - and noting the "possible cessation of separate criminal proceedings against the applicant if he were prepared to exchange sufficiently incriminating statements for wide-ranging comprehensively political subject areas which included the U.S. President himself as well as the Russian President Vladimir Putin."

Hilariously, the DOJ won a ruling in Austria to secure Firtash's extradition to Chicago - Austrian officials reversed course after his legal team filed new evidence that included the Weissmann overture , according to the report.

That new court filing asserts that two key witnesses, cited by the DOJ in its extradition request as affirming the bribery allegations against Firtash, since have recanted, claiming the FBI grossly misquoted them and pressured them to sign their statements. One witness claims his 2012 statement to the FBI was "prewritten by the U.S. authorities" and contains "relevant inaccuracies in substance," including that he never used the terms "bribery or bribe payments" as DOJ claimed, according to the Austrian court filing.

That witness also claimed he only signed the 2012 statement because the FBI "exercised undue pressure on him," including threats to seize his passport and keep him from returning home to India, the memo alleges. That witness recanted his statements the same summer as Weissmann's overture to Firtash's team.

Firtash's lawyers also offered the Austrian court evidence of alleged prosecutorial wrongdoing. - The Hill

Embarrassingly for the DOJ, a key document they submitted to Austria in support of Firtash's extradition allegedly from his corporate files and purportedly showing evidence that he sanctioned a bribery scheme in India was actually a slide from a powerpoint presentation created by the McKinsey consulting firm as part of a hypothetical presentation on ethics for the Boeing Corp.

Firtash's U.S. legal team told me it alerted Weissmann to DOJ's false portrayal of the McKinsey document in 2017, but he downplayed the concerns and refused to alert the Austrian court. The document was never withdrawn as evidence, even after the New York Times published a story last December questioning its validity. - The Hill

"Submitting a false and misleading document to a foreign sovereign and its courts for an extradition decision is not only unethical but also flouts the comity of trust necessary for that process where judicial systems rely only on documents to make that decision," Firtash's US legal team told Solomon. " DOJ's refusal to rescind the document after being specifically told it is false and misleading is an egregious violation of U.S. and international law. "


Leguran , 1 hour ago link

Weissmann has become a synonym for the word legal corruption. As in he committed a Weissmann meaning he committed fraud under color of authority.

LEEPERMAX , 1 hour ago link

Just in:

FBI Public SUICIDE OF TOP FBI AGENT Who Investigated THE CLINTON FOUNDATION . . .

https://truepundit.com/fbi-rocked-by-public-suicide-of-top-fbi-agent-who-investigated-clinton-foundation/

Boxed Merlot , 1 hour ago link

... "Submitting a false and misleading document to a foreign sovereign...flouts the comity of trust...

Maybe they thought they were in the UK. The FBI no longer has either a Comey or comity of trust left at this point. They've been nothing but a comedy of errors.

Send them all home.

2hangmen , 1 hour ago link

Weismann and Mueller are the perfect poster children of the Deep State. Total lack of ethics, conscience, morality, and an over abundance of arrogance and self righteousness. Washington is over flowing with these kind of evil people, and President Trump along with a group of covert Patriots are in the midst of eradicating these swine. With God's help, we just may be able to save our Country.

American2 , 1 hour ago link

The legal system now needs to do to Andrew Weissmann, what Weissmann severely wanted to do to Donald Trump.

rosiescenario , 3 hours ago link

You'd think that if there were enough decent attorneys in the Bar Association, guys like this one would be disbarred. Guess they are in a minority.

East Indian , 3 hours ago link

Mueller fatigue.

All this "Mueller this", "Comes that" news has reinforced the impression that these people will remain above the law even after 8 years of Trump presidency.

I will be very glad to be proved wrong.

oromae , 3 hours ago link

Weissmann is everything dirty about lawyers you've ever seen in the movies. Only he's real.

Let's hope he one day meets his reckoning.

[Jul 22, 2019] Report on evidence of felonies violating Civil Rights, and bribery by foreign agents, implicating United States Special Counsel Robert S Mueller III as a criminally-tainted agent of foreign racketeering interests

Notable quotes:
"... File talks about Mueller indulging big crimes as FBI director, helping Mueller's own eventual law firm to defraud millions out of a Hillary donor, with bribery of two USA federal judges, & threats to kill an ex-DOJ employee, with Mueller getting a big payday after he indulged it all as FBI chief, Mueller getting funds channeled from a criminal outfit based in the UK. ..."
Jul 22, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Brabantian says: May 6, 2019 at 2:39 am

Another item here, is the file which the US Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz acknowledged receiving a few months back, a file detailing alleged criminal acts of Robert Mueller himself.

The file was referenced in President Trump's tweets, a photo meme of Mueller in jail, and the President saying, "Heroes will come of this, and it won't be Mueller"

File talks about Mueller indulging big crimes as FBI director, helping Mueller's own eventual law firm to defraud millions out of a Hillary donor, with bribery of two USA federal judges, & threats to kill an ex-DOJ employee, with Mueller getting a big payday after he indulged it all as FBI chief, Mueller getting funds channeled from a criminal outfit based in the UK.

'Report on evidence of felonies violating Civil Rights, and bribery by foreign agents, implicating United States Special Counsel Robert S Mueller III as a criminally-tainted agent of foreign & racketeering interests'

https://www.docdroid.net/eVAAjIq/doj-ig-memo-mueller-bribery-extortion.pdf

[Jul 22, 2019] What Goes Around by Jim Kunstler

Notable quotes:
"... Though Mr. Mueller's final report asserted that the Russian government interfered in "a sweeping and systemic fashion" to influence the 2016 election, the 450-page great tome contains zero evidence to support that claim, and the discrepancy was actually noticed by federal judge Dabney Friedrich who is presiding over the case against the alleged Russian Facebook trolls that was one of the two tent-poles in the RussiaGate fantasy. The case is now blowing up in Robert Mueller's face. ..."
"... To the great surprise of Mr. Mueller and his "team," Mr. Prigozhin hired some American lawyers to defend his company in court. Smooth move. It automatically triggered the discovery process , by which the accused is entitled to see the evidence that prosecutors hold. It turned out that Mr. Mueller's team had no evidence that the Russian government was involved with the Facebook pranks. This annoyed Judge Friedrich, who ordered Mr. Mueller and his lawyers to desist making public statements about Concord and IRA's alleged "sweeping and systemic" collusion with Russia, and threatened legal sanctions if they did. ..."
"... It's now a matter of public record that the DNC servers were never examined by federal officials. They were purportedly scrutinized by a DNC contractor called CrowdStrike, co-founded by Russian Dimitri Alperovitch, an adversary of Vladimir Putin, active in US-based anti-Putin lobbying and PR. CrowdStrike's "draft" report on their review of the server was laughably incomplete, and the Mueller team's lawyers took no steps to validate it. ..."
"... It would be interesting to hear Robert Mueller's explanation for how come US computer forensic experts were never dispatched to take possession of the DNC servers. Surely a ranking member on either House committee would have to ask him that, along with many other embarrassing questions about the stupendously sloppy and disingenuous work of the Special Counsel's team. It was only one glaring omission among many. ..."
"... The entire Mueller episode smacks of prosecutorial misconduct. In retrospect, it can only be explained as a desperate act undertaken by foolishly overconfident political activists ..."
"... If Mr. Mueller thought he was being enlisted to play an historically heroic role to help get rid of an elected president detested by the Establishment, then he made the blunder of a lifetime. It was not the first blunder of his long career, but it was the final and fatal one. It is not out of the question that Mr. Mueller himself may eventually be the one indicted and convicted of real crimes against the people of the United States ..."
Jul 22, 2019 | kunstler.com

Just how dead is the RussiaGate story -- and how brain-dead are the House Democratic Committee chairmen, Nadler (Judiciary Committee) and Schiff (Intelligence Committee) to haul RussiaGate's front-man, Robert Mueller back into the spotlight where the next thing to roll over and die will be Mr. Mueller's evanescent reputation? The entrapment operation that was the Special Counsel's covert mission has turned out to be Mr. Mueller own personal booby-trap, prompting the question: is it possible that he's just not very bright? Though Mr. Mueller's final report asserted that the Russian government interfered in "a sweeping and systemic fashion" to influence the 2016 election, the 450-page great tome contains zero evidence to support that claim, and the discrepancy was actually noticed by federal judge Dabney Friedrich who is presiding over the case against the alleged Russian Facebook trolls that was one of the two tent-poles in the RussiaGate fantasy. The case is now blowing up in Robert Mueller's face.

In early 2018, Mr. Mueller sold a DC grand jury on producing indictments against a Russian outfit called the Internet Research Agency and its parent company Concord Management, owned by Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin for the so-called election meddling. The indictment was celebrated as a huge coup at the time by the likes of CNN and The New York Times , styled as a silver bullet in the heart of the Trump presidency. But the indicted parties were all in Russia, and could not be extradited, and there was zero expectation that any actual trial would ever take place -- leaving Mueller & Co. off-the-hook for proving their allegations.

To the great surprise of Mr. Mueller and his "team," Mr. Prigozhin hired some American lawyers to defend his company in court. Smooth move. It automatically triggered the discovery process , by which the accused is entitled to see the evidence that prosecutors hold. It turned out that Mr. Mueller's team had no evidence that the Russian government was involved with the Facebook pranks. This annoyed Judge Friedrich, who ordered Mr. Mueller and his lawyers to desist making public statements about Concord and IRA's alleged "sweeping and systemic" collusion with Russia, and threatened legal sanctions if they did.

Judge Friedrich's rulings were unsealed in early July, after Messers Nadler and Schiff had already scheduled Mr. Mueller's testimony before their committees. And now they're stuck with him. The only purpose of his appearance was to repeat and reinforce the narrative that the Russian government interfered in the election, which he is now forbidden to do, at least in connection to the Concord and IRA's activities.

But the other tentpole of the two-year-plus inquisition has also collapsed: the allegation that Russian intel hacked the DNC servers. It's now a matter of public record that the DNC servers were never examined by federal officials. They were purportedly scrutinized by a DNC contractor called CrowdStrike, co-founded by Russian Dimitri Alperovitch, an adversary of Vladimir Putin, active in US-based anti-Putin lobbying and PR. CrowdStrike's "draft" report on their review of the server was laughably incomplete, and the Mueller team's lawyers took no steps to validate it.

It would be interesting to hear Robert Mueller's explanation for how come US computer forensic experts were never dispatched to take possession of the DNC servers. Surely a ranking member on either House committee would have to ask him that, along with many other embarrassing questions about the stupendously sloppy and disingenuous work of the Special Counsel's team. It was only one glaring omission among many.

The whole affair now takes on tragic contours of Shakespearean dimensions. The Attorney General, Mr. Barr, is said to be an "old friend" of Mr. Mueller. They clashed pretty publicly after the release of Mr. Mueller's long-awaited final report. Mr. Barr must at least be dismayed by the bad faith and deliberate deceit in his old friend's final report, and he really has to do something about it. The entire Mueller episode smacks of prosecutorial misconduct. In retrospect, it can only be explained as a desperate act undertaken by foolishly overconfident political activists.

If Mr. Mueller thought he was being enlisted to play an historically heroic role to help get rid of an elected president detested by the Establishment, then he made the blunder of a lifetime. It was not the first blunder of his long career, but it was the final and fatal one. It is not out of the question that Mr. Mueller himself may eventually be the one indicted and convicted of real crimes against the people of the United States.

[Jul 22, 2019] 15 Questions Robert Mueller Must Answer

Those are weak question, but they are better then nothing. There are implicit rules that governs any witch hunt and Mueller adhered to them.
Notable quotes:
"... A cardinal rule for prosecutors is to not publicize negative information that does not lead them to indict someone -- "the decision does the talking." James Comey was criticized for doing this to Hillary Clinton during the campaign. Yet most of your Report's Volume II is just that, descriptions of actions by Trump that contain elements of obstruction but that you ultimately did not charge. Why did you include this information so prominently? ..."
"... The number of people with access to those intercepts is small, and the number inside the Obama White House with the authority to unmask names is even smaller. Yet details were leaked to the press and ended Flynn's career. Given that the leak may have exposed U.S. intelligence methods, that it had to have been done at a very high level inside the Obama White House, and that the leak violated Flynn's constitutional rights, did you investigate? If not, why not? ..."
"... Given the central role the Steele Dossier played in your work, and certainly in the investigation that commenced as Crossfire Hurricane in summer 2016, why did you not include any overall assessment of why so much did not check out inside such a key document? ..."
"... Prosecutors do not issue certificates of exoneration. The job is to charge or drop a case. That's what constitutes exoneration in any practical sense. Yet you have as your final line that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Why did you include that, and so prominently? ..."
"... Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well : How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and Hooper's War : A Novel of WWII Japan. ..."
"... Why the cryptic wording on the Steele Dossier? Why wasn't Trump given an opportunity to defend himself in court? ..."
"... "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." ..."
"... When are you going to examine the DNC's servers? ..."
"... Why did you rely solely upon the analysis produced by the DNC's hired consultants for the conclusion the DNC servers were hacked by Russians? ..."
"... It's supposed to be a big secret that the Russians DID NOT hack the DNC. It ruins their whole BS story. ..."
"... The status quo elites' attack dog was still salivating at the sound of the Democrats' dinner bell. ..."
"... 'Report on evidence of felonies violating Civil Rights, and bribery by foreign agents, implicating United States Special Counsel Robert S Mueller III as a criminally-tainted agent of foreign & racketeering interests' ..."
Jul 22, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com
movie with Bruce Willis and the kid who says "I see dead people"? In the end, it turns out everyone is already dead. Now imagine there are people who don't believe that. They insist the story ends some other way. Spoiler alert: the Mueller Report ends with no collusion. No one is going to prosecute anyone for obstruction. That stuff is all dead. We all saw the same movie.

Yet there seem to still be questions from those who don't get it. And while it's doubtful that the stoic Robert Mueller will ever write a tell-all book, or sit next to Seth Meyers and Trevor Noah to dish, he may be called in front of Congress. If he is, here's some of what he should be asked.

1) You didn't charge President Donald Trump with "collusion," obstruction, or any other new crime. Tell us why. If the answer is "the evidence did not support it," please say so.

2) Your Report did not refer any crimes to Congress, the SDNY, or anyone else. Again, tell us why. If the answer is "the evidence did not support it," please say so again.

3) Despite making no specific referrals, the Report does state, "The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of the powers of the office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law." Why did you include such a restating of a known fact? Many have read that line to mean you could not indict a sitting president and so you wanted to leave a clue to Congress. Yet you could have just spelled it out -- "this is beyond my and the attorney general's constitutional roles and must/can only be resolved by Congress." Why didn't you?

4) Similarly, many believe they see clues (a footnote looms as the grassy knoll of your work) that the only reason you did not indict Trump was because of Department of Justice and Office of Legal Counsel guidance against indicting a sitting president. Absent that, would you have indicted? If so, why didn't you say so unambiguously and trigger what would be the obvious next steps?

5) When did you conclude there was no collusion, conspiracy, or coordination between Trump and the Russians such that you would make no indictments? You must have closed at least some of the subplots -- the Trump Tower meeting, the Moscow Hotel project -- months ago. Did you consider announcing key findings as they occurred? You were clearly aware that there was inaccurate reporting, damaging to the public trust. Yet you allowed that to happen. Why?

6) But before you answer that question, answer this one. You made a pre-Report public statement saying Buzzfeed's story that claimed Trump ordered Michael Cohen to lie to Congress was false. You restated that in the Report, where you also mentioned that you privately told Jeff Sessions' lawyer in March 2018 that Sessions would not be charged. Since your work confirmed that nearly all bombshell reporting on Russiagate was wrong (Cohen was never in Prague, nothing criminal happened in the Seychelles, and so on), why was it only that single instance that caused you to speak out publicly? And as with Sessions, did you privately inform any others prior to the release of the Report that they would not be charged? What standard did you apply to those decisions?

Mueller Time is Finally Over CNN Disgraces Itself as the Mueller Report Shatters Media Dreams

7) A cardinal rule for prosecutors is to not publicize negative information that does not lead them to indict someone -- "the decision does the talking." James Comey was criticized for doing this to Hillary Clinton during the campaign. Yet most of your Report's Volume II is just that, descriptions of actions by Trump that contain elements of obstruction but that you ultimately did not charge. Why did you include this information so prominently? Some say it was because you wanted to draw a "road map" for impeachment. Why didn't you just say that? You had no reason to speak in riddles.

8) There is a lot of lying documented in the Report. But you seemed to only charge people with perjury (traps) early in your investigation. Was that aimed more at pressuring them to "flip" than at justice per se? Is one of the reasons several of the people in the Report who lied did not get charged with perjury later in the investigation because by then you knew they had nothing to flip on?

9) In regard to the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, where derogatory information on Hillary Clinton was offered (but never given), you declined prosecution. You cited in part questions over whether such information constituted the necessary "thing of value" that would have to exist, inter alia , to make its proffering a campaign finance violation. You don't answer the question in the Report, but you do believe information could be a "thing of value" (the thing of value must exceed $2,000 for a misdemeanor and $25,000 for a felony). What about withholding information? Could someone saying they would not offer information publicly be a "thing of value" and thus potentially part of a campaign finance law violation? Of course I'm talking about Stormy Daniels, who received money not to offer information. Would you make the claim that silence itself, non-information, is a "thing" of value?

10) You spend the entire first half of your Report, Volume I, explaining that "the Russians" sought to manipulate our 2016 election via social media and by hacking the Democratic National Committee. Though there is a lot of redacted material, at no point in the clear text is there information on whether the Russians actually did influence the election. Even trying was a crime, but given the importance of all this (some still claim the president is illegitimate) and the potential impact on future elections, did you look into the actual effects of Russian meddling? If not, why not?

11) Everything the Russians did, according to Volume I, they did on Obama's watch. Did you investigate anyone in the Obama administration in regard to Russian meddling? Did you look at what they did, what was missed, whether it could have been stopped, and how the response was formed? Given that Trump's actions towards Russia followed on steps Obama took, this seems relevant. Did you look? If not, why not?

12) Some of the information gathered about Michael Flynn was picked up inadvertently under existing surveillance of the Russian ambassador. As an American, Flynn's name would have been routinely masked in the reporting on those intercepts in order to protect his privacy. The number of people with access to those intercepts is small, and the number inside the Obama White House with the authority to unmask names is even smaller. Yet details were leaked to the press and ended Flynn's career. Given that the leak may have exposed U.S. intelligence methods, that it had to have been done at a very high level inside the Obama White House, and that the leak violated Flynn's constitutional rights, did you investigate? If not, why not?

13) The New York Times wrote that "some of the most sensational claims in the [Steele] dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove. Your report contained over a dozen passing references to the document's claims but no overall assessment of why so much did not check out." Given the central role the Steele Dossier played in your work, and certainly in the investigation that commenced as Crossfire Hurricane in summer 2016, why did you not include any overall assessment of why so much did not check out inside such a key document?

14) Prosecutors do not issue certificates of exoneration. The job is to charge or drop a case. That's what constitutes exoneration in any practical sense. Yet you have as your final line that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Why did you include that, and so prominently?

15) You also wrote, "if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state." You argue elsewhere in the Report that because Trump is a sitting president, he cannot be indicted, so therefore it would be unjust to accuse him of something he could not go to court and defend himself over. But didn't you do just that? Why did you leave the taint of guilt without giving Trump the means of defending himself in court? You must have understood that such wording would be raw meat to Democrats, and would force Trump to defend himself not in a court with legal protections, but in an often hostile media. Was that your intention?

Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well : How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and Hooper's War : A Novel of WWII Japan.

Roy Fassel says: April 30, 2019 at 11:06 pm

Why the cryptic wording on the Steele Dossier? Why wasn't Trump given an opportunity to defend himself in court?

Did you drink whiskey for breakfast? How could he defend himself in court when he was not charged in any court! Mueller made a decision it appears, that he could not charge the President with a crime while the president is in office. Mueller worked as an employee of the Justice Department and he has to follow Justice Department rules.

Carolinatarheel says: May 1, 2019 at 8:37 am

Mueller's good friend Comey deliberately leaked government information to someone outside the Department of Justice in order to get revenge for being fired and to prompt a Special Counsel. Comey knew his friend Mueller would be appointed!

Mueller spent over two years and Thirty Million Dollars of taxpayers money trying to create a crime to undermine President Trump!

Mueller simply cannot be trusted and should be thoroughly investigated!

America First!

Connecticut Farmer says: May 1, 2019 at 10:02 am

"while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

I've heard several legal experts opine that the above was a gratuitous and vexatious "coda", if you will, which served only to illustrate Mueller's sore loser attitude.

In the meantime the question of who these "Russians" were who allegedly tried to subvert the election process remains blissfully unanswered. And it says here that we probably never will find out the answer either.

Sid Finster says: May 1, 2019 at 12:58 pm
It's funny as all get out (TAC doesn't like it when I swear) watching Russiagate cultists keep pushing their conspiracy theory, in spite of the overwhelming evidence that there is nothing there.

But they cannot let it go, cannot admit that they were duped, and by many of the same crew who sold us the "Iraq is chock a block with WMDs", the "Assad gassed his own people ZOMG!" and the "Libyan rape rooms" lies.

The *really* funny and ironic part is that if they want evidence that Trump is working on behalf of foreign governments, the cultists need look no further than Israel and Saudi Arabia.

It's as if Melania were trying to catch Donald cheating. To prove it, she comes up with elaborate and absurd conspiracy theories involving body doubles, fake credit card receipts and a supposed secret Twitter code that Donald uses to communicate with his alleged lover.

While she's doing all that, and ignoring all the evidence that obliterates her theory, Mistress Bibi and Mistress Salman have the chains and whips and bondage gear on full display as they make Donald perform the most obscene and humiliating sexual services, right in front of Melania and everyone else, and with video footage to boot.

Of course, the rest of Team D and Team R would very much like to take Trump's place as Mistress Salman's slaveboi, so they pretend not to notice any of that.

Sid Finster says: May 1, 2019 at 2:33 pm
While we're playing these stupid games, I got some questions for Mueller to answer, yo.

1. When are you going to examine the DNC's servers?
2. Why did you rely solely upon the analysis produced by the DNC's hired consultants for the conclusion the DNC servers were hacked by Russians?
3. When are you planning to question Assange or Craig Murray? Did you not know their whereabouts for the last two years, or were you choosing only that evidence that fit your preordained conclusion, like you did when you testified before Congress about Iraqi WMDs?

WorkingClass says: May 1, 2019 at 5:35 pm
Sid Finster:

It's supposed to be a big secret that the Russians DID NOT hack the DNC. It ruins their whole BS story.

Fran Macadam says: May 1, 2019 at 6:33 pm
The status quo elites' attack dog was still salivating at the sound of the Democrats' dinner bell.
JK says: May 2, 2019 at 9:58 am

In a jury trial, a unanimous guilty verdict is a conviction; a unanimous acquital is an exoneration. There is a gray area in between of a mistrial which is neither a conviction nor an exoneration. Mueller closed the obstruction claims because the odds of getting convictions on such flimsly politically-motivated claims are nearly zero. However, it is also clear that in a jury trial there would not be a unanimous acquital, precisely because the accusations are so partisan, so some jurors can be expected to vote guilty. That is why there no "exoneration".

Ken Zaretzke says: May 2, 2019 at 4:11 pm
The lawyers at Lawfare blog talk about how Mueller, as an "institutionalist," is a true conservative. If he's an institutionalist, why did he accept a special counsel appointment in which no crime was plausibly identified? Prosecutors are supposed to look at, and prosecute, crimes–that's their institutional job. The Steele dossier was the only basis for thinking there was a crime committed by Trump or his campaign. Institutionalism–if it means anything at all–therefore would have made an examination of its origins immediately necessary. Mueller didn't do that.

What kind of institutionalism is this? Not the kind anyone, least of all conservatives, should give any respect.

Brabantian says: May 6, 2019 at 2:39 am

Another item here, is the file which the US Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz acknowledged receiving a few months back, a file detailing alleged criminal acts of Robert Mueller himself.

The file was referenced in President Trump's tweets, a photo meme of Mueller in jail, and the President saying, "Heroes will come of this, and it won't be Mueller"

File talks about Mueller indulging big crimes as FBI director, helping Mueller's own eventual law firm to defraud millions out of a Hillary donor, with bribery of two USA federal judges, & threats to kill an ex-DOJ employee, with Mueller getting a big payday after he indulged it all as FBI chief, Mueller getting funds channelled from a criminal outfit based in the UK.

'Report on evidence of felonies violating Civil Rights, and bribery by foreign agents, implicating United States Special Counsel Robert S Mueller III as a criminally-tainted agent of foreign & racketeering interests'

https://www.docdroid.net/eVAAjIq/doj-ig-memo-mueller-bribery-extortion.pdf

Pokwok says: May 7, 2019 at 6:38 am There are a lot of idiots in this comment section

It's kind of amazing actually. And scary. The Trump derangement syndrome is very real. That normal, regular people are now going to bat for the likes of Mueller, Comey and Brennan says a lot about how successful the media's obfuscation and gaslighting has been. Despite everything we've seen, people are still taking even this very light and I would have thought uncontroversial criticism of the Mueller report as outlandish and unwarranted

A little surprised the readership of this site is so ready to lap up the spin of Democrats, who so obviously have everything to lose here. And so obviously have had Mueller tossing them empty but effective 'red meat' consistently throughout this whole process. Not to mention the blatant goalpost shifting at every turn.

There are so many reasons and ways to go after Trump, but 'obstructing' an investigation into obstruction of itself ? Give me a break. What Orwellian nonsense.

[Jul 20, 2019] And why didn't they interview Julian Assange? And did the FBI look into the Seth Rich murder investigation?

Jul 20, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Smi1ey , 5 hours ago link

Robert Mueller, might have to answer some embarrassing questions about the conduct of his investigation -- like, why did it go on for two years when his chief deputy, Mr. Weissmann, was informed from the get-go that the main predicate document was a fraud?

And why didn't they interview Julian Assange?

And did the FBI look into the Seth Rich murder investigation?

[Jul 18, 2019] Brennan used using Dmitri Alperovitch of 'Crowdstrike' as a tool to corrupt the processes of investigation of DNC leaks.

Notable quotes:
"... Moreover, if, as the memorandum asserted, 'British officials' were also aware that the 'most reliable intelligence' exonerated the Syrian government, rather fundamental questions arose as to how the JIC had felt able to claim precisely the reverse in support of David Cameron's unsuccessful attempt on 29 August to win Commons' support for British participation in air strikes. ..."
"... At the time, the Director General, Defence and Intelligence at the FCO was one Robert Hannigan, who in April 2014 would be appointed as Director of GCHQ. The National Security Adviser was a certain Sir Kim Darroch, whose appointment as Ambassador to the U.S. would be announced in August 2015. Both have been in the news, in relation to 'Russiagate.' ..."
"... Obviously, the same question arises about both of them as about Brennan: are they 'Gleiwitz types', who were actively complicit in preparing a murderous 'false flag', or were they simply part of a rather stupid Anglo-American 'dog', whom the 'tail', in the shape of the jihadists and their Turkish, Saudi and Qatari backers, could 'wag', as they chose? ..."
"... From the articles which Seymour Hersh published in the 'London Review of Books', and other materials, it became evident that the Defense Intelligence Agency, then headed by General Flynn, had been aware of the likelihood of fresh 'false flags' -- after the small scale incidents in spring 2013. ..."
"... An argument that 'Sundance' has repeatedly made is that a lot of what was happening in mid-2016, including the dossier attributed to Steele, had to do with the need to find justifications for these questionable surveillance operations. ..."
"... While I think there is something in this, I have long thought that the discovery that a mass of material exfiltrated from the DNC, and was going to be published by 'WikiLeaks', and the subsequent murder of Seth Rich, are likely to have been critically important triggers. ..."
"... panic-stricken improvisation found alike in the dossier, and the claims about the 'digital forensics' made by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'CrowdStrike', and the former GCHQ person Matt Tait. ..."
"... A week later, Butowsky filed a new action, in which the suggestion of a very-wide ranging conspiracy to suppress the truth about both the DNC leaks and Rich's murder was turned into a catalogue of defamation claims against a long list of people, including, as well as a variety of lawyers involved, CNN, the'Nw York Times', Vox, and the DNC. ..."
"... 'That Seth Rich was wacked because he stole the DNC emails and transferred them to Wikileaks is a conspiracy theory. It is possible and even plausible, but there is no evidence to confirm it. Many people seem to believe it because it makes more sense than the competing conspiracy theory, that Russia hacked the DNC and handed the emails to Wikileaks. Isikoff's claim, that Russia planted the Rich conspiracy theory, has no sound base. That theory existed before anything "Russian" mentioned it.' ..."
"... Reading the full text of Ms. Craven's report, I can see quite how well justified was Larry's suggestion in his post that Folkenflik and NPR were on a very sticky wicket indeed (as we say in England.) ..."
"... However, 'fools rush in', as the saying goes, so Isikoff decided to conspire with Deborah Sines, apparently the former U.S. assistant attorney in charge of investigating Seth Rich's murder, to suggest that suggestions that the victim had been the source of the material from the DNC published by 'WikiLeaks' originated as just another Russian plot. ..."
"... It appears that prior to the publication of his 'report', Isikoff talked to Butowsky, who in his efforts to dissuade him explained that his involvement in the whole affair began when Ellen Ratner, a news analyst with Fox, and sister of the late Michael Ratner, who had been an attorney for Assange, contacted him in Fall 2016 about a meeting she had with her that figure. ..."
"... And then, not particularly surprisingly, Butowsky and Clevenger abandoned their inhibitions about identifying Ellen Ratner as a source, and filled in a lot of 'blanks' in their 'narrative' about how Seth Rich lived and died. ..."
"... Among the many problems for Brennan and his co-conspirators -- among whom, on the British side, Hannigan and Darroch, and also Sedwill, are very important -- one relates to the way that the capabilities of 'scientific forensics', in all kinds of areas, have increased by leaps and bounds in recent years. ..."
"... This has meant that they have had little option but to corrupt the processes of investigation. The ludicrous claims by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'Crowdstrike' and the former GCHQ person Matt Tait, which nobody but a fool -- congenital 'useful idiot' one might say -- or a knave would dare to defend in public, are only one of many cases in point. ..."
Jul 18, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

David Habakkuk , 16 July 2019 at 01:14 PM

Larry,

One does not like to admit to having been one of John Brennan's 'useful idiots' -- I had thought I could see through any of the 'active measures' which he and his co-conspirators, on both sides of the Atlantic, could dream up. But I had swallowed whole the notion that Michael Flynn had been stupid enough knowingly to get involved in Erdoğan's feud with Gülen.

In fairness, however, I do think that when dealing with spiders like the former head of the CIA, a prudent fly needs to be sure he, or she, gets competent legal advice at the outset.

It may perhaps be interesting to put your account together with a post by 'Sundance' on the 'Conservative Treehouse' site on 14 July, headlined 'Devin Nunes Discusses Upcoming Mueller Testimony '

This takes up the issue, on which its author has commented extensively, of illegitimate access by contractors to the databases of NSA intercepts -- an issue which is clearly bound up with that of the use of such material to create the 'web' in which Flynn found himself hopelessly entangled.

The post by 'Sundance' suggests, just as you do, that the driving force behind what has happened was actually John Brennan. The April 2017 ruling by FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer does not definitely establish that the illegitimate access of contractors started in 2012, but it definitely strongly suggests that it did.

Reading the 6 September 'Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity' memorandum to Obama, entitled 'Is Syria a Trap?', whose signatories included both you and Colonel Lang, it seemed overwhelmingly likely to some of us who were familiar with both your writings that Brennan had to have been involved in a conspiracy with the Turks, Saudis, and Qataris.

(To my surprise, this can no longer be accessed at the 'Consortium News' site. However, it is still available at http://www.shoah.org.uk/2013/09/10/page/2/ .)

One relevant question related to whether the role of the Americans involved in this conspiracy was simply 'ex post facto' exploitation of the patent 'false flag' sarin atrocity at Ghouta the previous 21 August to attempt to inveigle the United States into toppling Assad, or whether there was 'ex ante' complicity.

Moreover, if, as the memorandum asserted, 'British officials' were also aware that the 'most reliable intelligence' exonerated the Syrian government, rather fundamental questions arose as to how the JIC had felt able to claim precisely the reverse in support of David Cameron's unsuccessful attempt on 29 August to win Commons' support for British participation in air strikes.

At the time, the Director General, Defence and Intelligence at the FCO was one Robert Hannigan, who in April 2014 would be appointed as Director of GCHQ. The National Security Adviser was a certain Sir Kim Darroch, whose appointment as Ambassador to the U.S. would be announced in August 2015. Both have been in the news, in relation to 'Russiagate.'

Obviously, the same question arises about both of them as about Brennan: are they 'Gleiwitz types', who were actively complicit in preparing a murderous 'false flag', or were they simply part of a rather stupid Anglo-American 'dog', whom the 'tail', in the shape of the jihadists and their Turkish, Saudi and Qatari backers, could 'wag', as they chose?

From the articles which Seymour Hersh published in the 'London Review of Books', and other materials, it became evident that the Defense Intelligence Agency, then headed by General Flynn, had been aware of the likelihood of fresh 'false flags' -- after the small scale incidents in spring 2013.

And it was clear enough, if one bothered to study the 'open source' material at all carefully, that the DIA had been a key locus of opposition to the strategies being pursued by Brennan, together with his British co-conspirators.

Accordingly, the fact that an 'interagency memorandum of understanding', which according to Collyer's judgement looks as though it may well date from 2012 -- the year Brennan was appointed to head the CIA -- appears to have led, in that year, to the granting of access to the material, through the FBI, to outside contractors, looks somewhat interesting. (This is well covered by 'Sundance'.)

So, I find myself asking whether in fact this gross abuse of the role of the NSA was not linked at the outset to the divisions within the American intelligence apparatus and military about policy towards the Middle East, and also whether this may not be relevant to assessing the role of Robert Mueller, who was FBI Director through until September 2013.

An argument that 'Sundance' has repeatedly made is that a lot of what was happening in mid-2016, including the dossier attributed to Steele, had to do with the need to find justifications for these questionable surveillance operations.

While I think there is something in this, I have long thought that the discovery that a mass of material exfiltrated from the DNC, and was going to be published by 'WikiLeaks', and the subsequent murder of Seth Rich, are likely to have been critically important triggers.

Among other things, I do not think that the version given by 'Sundance' can explain the air of panic-stricken improvisation found alike in the dossier, and the claims about the 'digital forensics' made by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'CrowdStrike', and the former GCHQ person Matt Tait.

I see that there has now been a dramatic escalation in the legal battles which began when Ed Butowsky bought his initial action against David Folkenflik and his 'NPR' colleagues in June 2018. The discovery process in that action was followed by an 'Amended Complaint' on 5 March this year.

A week later, Butowsky filed a new action, in which the suggestion of a very-wide ranging conspiracy to suppress the truth about both the DNC leaks and Rich's murder was turned into a catalogue of defamation claims against a long list of people, including, as well as a variety of lawyers involved, CNN, the'Nw York Times', Vox, and the DNC.

On 9 July, Michael Isikoff published a story alleging that the claims about Rich and his murder were the result of a Russian 'active measures' operation -- to use a favourite phrase of TTG's.

A useful account, with links, is provided by our colleague 'b', at 'Moon of Alabama', at https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/07/isikoff-who-first-peddled-the-fake-steele-dossier-invents-new-russian-influence-story.html .

Concluding his piece, 'b' wrote:

'That Seth Rich was wacked because he stole the DNC emails and transferred them to Wikileaks is a conspiracy theory. It is possible and even plausible, but there is no evidence to confirm it. Many people seem to believe it because it makes more sense than the competing conspiracy theory, that Russia hacked the DNC and handed the emails to Wikileaks. Isikoff's claim, that Russia planted the Rich conspiracy theory, has no sound base. That theory existed before anything "Russian" mentioned it.'

As it happens, Butowsky and his lawyer, Ty Clevenger, obviously decided it was time to, as it were, 'unmask their batteries', and provide some of the evidence they have been accumulating.

There is another useful post by 'Sundance', which in turn links to a very interesting post on the Gateway Pundit' site. From there, you can access both Clevenger's blog post, and the text of the 'Amended Complaint.'

(See https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/07/15/lawsuit-claims-julian-assange-confirmed-dnc-emails-received-from-seth-rich-not-a-russian-hack/ .)

It seems likely that Butowsky and Clevenger were pushed into acting a bit sooner than they had intended. The fact that the name of Ellen Ratner, clearly a pivotal participant, was misspellled 'Rattner' in the 'Amended Complaint', is likely to be an indication of this.

However, I also think that Clevenger, who seems to me a first-class 'ferret', could do with the services of an old-style secretary, who checked his productions before they went out.

turcopolier , 16 July 2019 at 02:34 PM
As I have previously mentioned, I testified several times in Collyer's Washington district court on non-FISA matters. My impression was that she is a very ambitious woman who wishes always to do DoJ's bidding.

David Habakkuk -> turcopolier ... , 18 July 2019 at 01:28 PM

Pat,

Your recollections of Collyer had, unfortunately, slipped my mind when I posted my comment above. So, unfortunately, had Larry's post on Judge Caroline M. Craven's denial in her report dated 17 April 2019 of the Motion to Dismiss filed by David Folkenflik and his NPR colleagues in the defamation case brought against them by Ed Butowsky.

At the time of his post, the full text of the judgement was only available on PACER, which requires a subscription. However, looking at the 'Court Listener' site, I now see that both it and some other key documents in the case are freely available.

(See https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7244731/butowsky-v-folkenflik/ .)

Reading the full text of Ms. Craven's report, I can see quite how well justified was Larry's suggestion in his post that Folkenflik and NPR were on a very sticky wicket indeed (as we say in England.)

And I can also see more clearly why, following the judgement, Butowsky and Ty Clevenger felt they were in a position to launch an action both against some of the major legal players in the cover-up of the fact that the materials published by the DNC were leaked by Seth Rich, not hacked by the Russians, and also key disseminators of the cover-up, CNN, the NYT, and Vox.

The most important documents in that case are also now free available on 'Court Listener', at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/14681570/butowsky-v-gottlieb/ .

What looks to have happened subsequently is a natural enough process of escalation.

Among those who rather actively promoted the hogwash attributed to Christopher Steele was Michael Isikoff, who is, apparently, chief investigative correspondent for Yahoo News. In April, he was reported in 'Vanity Fair' conceding that 'I think it's fair to say that all of us should have approached this, in retrospect, with more skepticism'.

(See https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/the-steele-dossiers-moment-of-truth-arrives-journalists-argue-its-impact .)

Any 'investigative reporter' worth his or her salt would have done elementary checks on the dossier immediately, and not touched it with a bargepole -- again, as we used to say in England. Also, even among the incompetent and corrupt, common prudence might have suggested caution.

However, 'fools rush in', as the saying goes, so Isikoff decided to conspire with Deborah Sines, apparently the former U.S. assistant attorney in charge of investigating Seth Rich's murder, to suggest that suggestions that the victim had been the source of the material from the DNC published by 'WikiLeaks' originated as just another Russian plot.

(See https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-the-true-origins-of-the-seth-rich-conspiracy-a-yahoo-news-investigation-100000831.html .)

It appears that prior to the publication of his 'report', Isikoff talked to Butowsky, who in his efforts to dissuade him explained that his involvement in the whole affair began when Ellen Ratner, a news analyst with Fox, and sister of the late Michael Ratner, who had been an attorney for Assange, contacted him in Fall 2016 about a meeting she had with her that figure.

Although Butowsky intended the conversation to be 'off the record', and the idea was emphatically not that Isikoff would contact Ellen Ratner, he did. It seems that -- not particularly surprisingly, in the current climate -- she lied to him, and he was stupid enough to think that this meant he could get away with publishing his story.

(See https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/07/breaking-lawsuit-outs-reporter-ellen-ratner-as-source-for-seth-rich-information/ .)

And then, not particularly surprisingly, Butowsky and Clevenger abandoned their inhibitions about identifying Ellen Ratner as a source, and filled in a lot of 'blanks' in their 'narrative' about how Seth Rich lived and died.

I am still in the process of digesting the new information. However, a couple of preliminary observations about the implications may be worth making.

Among the many problems for Brennan and his co-conspirators -- among whom, on the British side, Hannigan and Darroch, and also Sedwill, are very important -- one relates to the way that the capabilities of 'scientific forensics', in all kinds of areas, have increased by leaps and bounds in recent years.

This has meant that they have had little option but to corrupt the processes of investigation. The ludicrous claims by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'Crowdstrike' and the former GCHQ person Matt Tait, which nobody but a fool -- congenital 'useful idiot' one might say -- or a knave would dare to defend in public, are only one of many cases in point.

What is really dangerous for the conspirators, however, is when the problems they have in contesting rational arguments about the 'scientific forensics' come together with problems relating to more 'old-fashioned' kinds of evidence: crucially, 'witness testimony'.

This, I think, may now be happening.

It also seems to me quite likely that some of those 'in the know' -- including perhaps Rosemary Collyer -- had seen what was liable to happen a good while ago, and decided that a prudent 'rat' keeps its options open.

[Jul 17, 2019] 13 Russian Indictments -- Letter From Putin to Mueller

Notable quotes:
"... I originally published this as a satirical Facebook Note on February 21, 2018, after the New York Times reported on February 16, 2018 that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had indicted 13 Russians. ..."
Jul 15, 2019 | medium.com

Michael Weddle Follow Jul 15 · 3 min read

I originally published this as a satirical Facebook Note on February 21, 2018, after the New York Times reported on February 16, 2018 that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had indicted 13 Russians.

February 21, 2018

The Honorable Robert Swan Mueller III
Special Investigating Counsel
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530–0001

Dear Mr. Mueller:

I read with great interest your indictments of 13 Russian citizens and three Russian corporations.

Please note that Russia encourages you to continue your investigatory efforts as we are confident you will find that neither myself or any representatives of my office and government have anything to do with what many of your politicians and media members are describing as "Russian collusion" or "Russian meddling" with the US 2016 elections.

Also, as a side note, please know that we in Russia are completely surprised at how you conducted your 2016 election. From the vantage point of anyone living outside of America those elections did not appear fair at all. We in Russia are surprised by this as we thought you were a better nation than what we saw from your 2016 national elections.

Although the United States of America and The Russian Federation hold no formal extradition treaty agreement, please be advised I am willing to use the powers of my office to contact those whom you've indicted and I will do my utmost to encourage them to come to America in order to stand the trial of your indictments. We are confident that your jurisprudence system for legal discovery will produce both remarkable and enlightening evidence for your investigation.

On a mundane matter, would you be willing to pay for the costs of their travel and housing expenses while they stand trial in America, or would you prefer that The Russian Federation to cover this expense?

Finally, please find attached a copy of the Constitution of The Russian Federation. You are welcome to share with your fellow citizens as we are confident they will become very surprised by what they learn from reading the contents of our Constitution.

http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-01.htm

Very truly yours,

Vladimir Putin, President The Russian Federation

PS: I strongly recommend that your FBI, NSA and DHS departments thoroughly examine the DNC computers in order to determine if they were actually "hacked." I'm confident you will discover that the documents published by Wikileaks were the product of an inside "leak" onto a thumb drive. Please note that I am shocked that the thoroughness of your investigation has not yet accomplished this simple and obvious task.

[Jul 17, 2019] Sic Transit Gloria Mueller by Ray McGovern

Mueller looks more and more like dirty Clinton fixer.
Notable quotes:
"... The Feb. 2018 indictment referred repeatedly to the IRA simply as a "Russian organization." But in Mueller's report 14 months later, the "Russian organization" had somehow morphed into "Russia." The IRA's lawyers argued, in effect, that Mueller's ipse-dixit "Russia did it" does not suffice as proof of Russian government involvement. Federal Judge Friedrich agreed and ordered Mueller to cease promoting his evidence-less charge against the IRA; she added that "any future violations of her order will trigger a range of potential sanctions." ..."
"... In testimony to Congress in October 2017, Facebook General Counsel Colin Stretch had cautioned earlier that from 2015 to 2017, "Americans using Facebook were exposed to, or 'served,' a total of over 33 trillion stories in their News Feeds." Shamefully misleading "analysis" by Times reporters Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti in a 10,000-word article on September 20, 2018 made the case that the IRA's 80,000 posts helped deliver the presidency to Trump. ..."
"... Shane and Mazzetti neglected to report the 33 trillion number for needed context, even though the Times ' own coverage of Stretch's 2017 testimony stated outright: "Facebook cautioned that the Russia-linked posts represented a minuscule amount of content compared with the billions of posts that flow through users' News Feeds everyday." ..."
"... CrowdStrike, the controversial cybersecurity firm that the Democratic National Committee chose over the FBI in 2016 to examine its compromised computer servers, never produced an un-redacted or final forensic report for the government because the FBI never required it to, the Justice Department admitted. ..."
"... With Erin Ratner being named as a conduit between Seth Rich and Wikileaks in a lawsuit yesterday – the second flimsy leg of Mueller's claims – gets cut off at the knees. ..."
Jul 17, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

... ... ...

Requiem for 'Interference'

Daniel Lazare's July 12 Consortium News piece shatters one of the twin prongs in Mueller's case that "the Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion." It was the prong dripping with incessant drivel about the Kremlin using social media to help Trump win in 2016.

Mueller led off his Russiagate report, a redacted version of which was published on April 18, with the dubious claim that his investigation had

" established that Russia interfered in the 2016 election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working in the Clinton campaign, and then released stolen documents."

Judge to Mueller: Put Up or Shut Up

Mueller: Needs more time. (Flickr)

Regarding the social-media accusation, Judge Friederich has now told Mueller, in effect, to put up or shut up. What happened was this: On February 16, 2018 a typically credulous grand jury -- the usual kind that cynics say can be persuaded to indict the proverbial ham sandwich -- was convinced by Mueller to return 16 indictments of the Internet Research Agency (IRA) and associates in St. Petersburg, giving his all-deliberate-speed investigation some momentum and a much-needed, if short-lived, "big win" in "proving" interference by Russia in the 2016 election. It apparently never occurred to Mueller and the super-smart lawyers around him that the Russians would outsmart them by hiring their own lawyers to show up in U.S. court and seek discovery. Oops.

The Feb. 2018 indictment referred repeatedly to the IRA simply as a "Russian organization." But in Mueller's report 14 months later, the "Russian organization" had somehow morphed into "Russia." The IRA's lawyers argued, in effect, that Mueller's ipse-dixit "Russia did it" does not suffice as proof of Russian government involvement. Federal Judge Friedrich agreed and ordered Mueller to cease promoting his evidence-less charge against the IRA; she added that "any future violations of her order will trigger a range of potential sanctions."

More specifically, at the conclusion of a hearing held under seal on May 28, Judge Friedrich ordered the government "to refrain from making or authorizing any public statement that links the alleged conspiracy in the indictment to the Russian government or its agencies." The judge ordered further that "any public statement about the allegations in the indictment . . . must make clear that, one, the government is summarizing the allegations in the indictment which remain unproven, and, two, the government does not express an opinion on the defendant's guilt or innocence or the strength of the evidence in this case."

Reporting Thursday on Judge Friedrich's ruling, former CIA and State Department official Larry C. Johnson described it as a "potential game changer," observing that Mueller "has not offered one piece of solid evidence that the defendants were involved in any way with the government of Russia." After including a lot of useful background material, Johnson ends by noting:

"Some readers will insist that Mueller and his team have actual intelligence but cannot put that in an indictment. Well boys and girls, here is a simple truth–if you cannot produce evidence that can be presented in court then you do not have a case. There is that part of the Constitution that allows those accused of a crime to confront their accusers."

IRA Story a 'Stretch'

Last fall, investigative journalist Gareth Porter dissected and debunked The New York Times 's far-fetched claim that 80,000 Facebook posts by the Internet Research Agency helped swing the election to Donald Trump. What the Times story neglected to say is that the relatively paltry 80,000 posts were engulfed in literally trillions of posts on Facebook over the two-year period in question -- before and after the 2016 election.

Stretch and executives from Facebook, Twitter and Google hauled before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on crime and terrorism on Oct. 31, 2017.

In testimony to Congress in October 2017, Facebook General Counsel Colin Stretch had cautioned earlier that from 2015 to 2017, "Americans using Facebook were exposed to, or 'served,' a total of over 33 trillion stories in their News Feeds." Shamefully misleading "analysis" by Times reporters Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti in a 10,000-word article on September 20, 2018 made the case that the IRA's 80,000 posts helped deliver the presidency to Trump.

Shane and Mazzetti neglected to report the 33 trillion number for needed context, even though the Times ' own coverage of Stretch's 2017 testimony stated outright: "Facebook cautioned that the Russia-linked posts represented a minuscule amount of content compared with the billions of posts that flow through users' News Feeds everyday."

The chances that Americans saw any of these IRA ads -- let alone were influenced by them -- are infinitismal. Porter and others did the math and found that over the two-year period, the 80,000 Russian-origin Facebook posts represented just 0.0000000024 of total Facebook content in that time. Porter commented that this particular Times contribution to the Russiagate story "should vie in the annals of journalism as one of the most spectacularly misleading uses of statistics of all time."

And now we know, courtesy of Judge Friederich, that Mueller has never produced proof, beyond his say-so, that the Russian government was responsible for the activities of the IRA -- feckless as they were. That they swung the election is clearly a stretch.

The Other Prong: Hacking the DNC

The second of Mueller's two major accusations of Russian interference, as noted above, charged that "a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working in the Clinton campaign, and then released stolen documents." Sadly for Russiagate aficionados, the evidence behind that charge doesn't hold water either.

CrowdStrike, the controversial cybersecurity firm that the Democratic National Committee chose over the FBI in 2016 to examine its compromised computer servers, never produced an un-redacted or final forensic report for the government because the FBI never required it to, the Justice Department admitted.

The revelation came in a court filing by the government in the pre-trial phase of Roger Stone, a long-time Republican operative who had an unofficial role in the campaign of candidate Donald Trump. Stone has been charged with misleading Congress, obstructing justice and intimidating a witness.

The filing was in response to a motion by Stone's lawyers asking for "unredacted reports" from CrowdStrike challenging the government to prove that Russia hacked the DNC server. "The government does not possess the information the defendant seeks," the DOJ filing says.

Small wonder that Mueller had hoped to escape further questioning. If he does testify on July 24, the committee hearings will be well worth watching.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was a CIA analyst for 27 years and a presidential briefer. In retirement he co-founded Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. His colleagues and he have been following closely the ins and outs of Russiagate.


Carlos , July 17, 2019 at 12:52

With Erin Ratner being named as a conduit between Seth Rich and Wikileaks in a lawsuit yesterday – the second flimsy leg of Mueller's claims – gets cut off at the knees.

cletus , July 17, 2019 at 05:29

just read your article at lewrockwell on 7/17.

you gave all the facts that irrefutably condemn the mueller hoax and reveal what a con man he is. I salute you for this.

unfortutunately, you then come to a conclusion that cannot be supported by an reasonable person.

you think that mueller's con will be called out by the republicans on the committee.

what a joke. They will avoid like the plague revealling that the russia claims by mueller are a hoax.
they'll focus completely on ' you did conclude that trump didn't collude with the russians, right?"

anyone who's been paying attention at all knows this.

Robert G. Hilton , July 17, 2019 at 01:13

There was no expert report showing hacking because the expert had found that the Russians did not hack. Simple as that. The way it works is, that an expert puts nothing in writing until AFTER orally consulting with the attorney who hired him. If the news is bad for said attorney, then the expert is instructed NEVER to put the bad news in writing. I used to hire experts when I litigated patent infringement cases, and that is the way it works. If you pay the expert, then you make the rules. The judge may understand this too. I'm pretty sure that the Crowd Strike expert also gave Muller (Andrew Wiseman?) the same news about no hacking.

michael weddle , July 16, 2019 at 22:41

Why, shortly after Random Juan claimed the presidency, was a Crowdstrike employee trying to stoke the Venezuelan coup?

https://steemit.com/venezuela/@michaelweddle/crowdstrike-employee-tweeting-pro-coup-propaganda-on-venezuela

Bailey , July 16, 2019 at 20:27

I wish that this constant debunking of Russia Gate would be doing some good. Sadly it's not. Most of the members of daily kos believe everything about Russia Gate and even after reading some of the great essays written here that debunks it they instead say that this website has been bought out by Russia.

I once thought that if people really looked at the evidence or lack of it that they would wake up and smell the propaganda. It has always been so obvious to me that there was never any there there and I couldn't understand how people bought into it. But I think it has to do with who people voted for in the last election. Hillary's supporters just can't believe that she could have lost without outside interference. Sad.

ex-PFC Chuck , July 16, 2019 at 18:08

A post yesterday at The Conservative Treehouse expands on a Gateway Pundit post about an amended filing to the court in a Texas libel suit that could blow the whole Russia-gate hoax wide open, taking with it whatever shred of credibility the Mueller Report might still have. Not to mention the rationale for silencing Assange, General Flynn's prosecution, and the murder of Seth Rich.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/07/15/lawsuit-claims-julian-assange-confirmed-dnc-emails-received-from-seth-rich-not-a-russian-hack/

Vera Moldt , July 16, 2019 at 17:13

It looks like this fraudulent fable has finally been debunked by the US judicial system. Now the Hillary bots will have to come up with another excuse for her wealthy donors as to why she lost the election to a much maligned TV host that spent a small fraction of her campaign funding. This also takes some of the fuel out of using the Russiagate fraud for a march to war with Russia that was accompanied by large defense spending increases. Russiagate was the perfect gift to the Clinton campaign apologists and the MIC that needs a causus belli to feed the public war machine. That gift box has now been unraveled to display an empty box. I'm surprised Ray McGovern did not bring up the issue of the alleged hacking of DNC emails to have been contrary to the capability of the internet at that time. The rate of transfer was consistent with downloading to a flash drive but impossible for transfer of packets across an IP network – further debunking the Russia hacking narrative. This whole house of cards has crashed in and it seems that it will be impossible for the Russiagate fraudsters to reconstruct their tawdry myth.

jaycee , July 16, 2019 at 14:08

Perceptive bloggers identified the IRA as a commercial clickbait operation two years ago. Everything about that operation was consistent with that description. Describing the IRA as a Russian government psy-op program, in turn, was inconsistent with the evidence at hand and so required the assumption that its purpose was to "sow chaos", or similar guesswork. It should be remembered that the Facebook / Twitter people were initially reluctant to go along with the latter theory, and only came on board after a great deal of pressure from members of Congress such as Mark Warner. So this whole nonsensical story was magnified at the insistence of powerful Democratic congressional persons, and Mueller was simply bolstering their arguments – which was his job it appears. The result has been not only a false consciousness deliberately seeded through the public, but also a raft of social media and alternative news censorship which has been silencing both alt-right and progressive voices.

Jeff Harrison , July 16, 2019 at 13:45

Thanx, Ray. I've said from the outset that Russiagate was bullshit perpetrated by Three Names who just couldn't stand the fact that this was the latest in a long string of failures that this incompetent, arrogant woman perpetrated on the American people. It was bullshit from jump street because Three Names won the election by 3M votes but in the American presidential election you not only need the votes, you need the distribution. Distribution she didn't have. Russia (or any other actor sufficiently large and determined) can sway votes for one candidate or another but they can't sway distribution. I personally thought the claim that Russia via the Internet Research Agency sought to sway the election by disparaging Three Names and pumping up Thump. Three Names won by 3M votes. Looks like Russia's IRA did a spectacularly poor job of meddling.

There are some take aways from this that the government should be looking into/doing something about.
1. Russiagate never had any legs. The legs that it got came from an effort by the deep state to create them out of thin air. The deep state tried to take on the role of the Praetorian Guard in old Rome. Their role originally was to protect the emperor but it morphed over the years into picking who would be the emperor. The likes of Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Struck (however you spell it) and his femme fatale (at a minimum, there may be more) should all be marched off to jail and locked up for a considerable period of time for their attempts to destroy our democracy (or republic – a distinction without a difference).

2. Seth Rich's murder needs to be actually investigated now that he has been outed as the source of the leak to Wikileaks.

3. The Republican party needs to be banned as a political party. Any clear eyed view of the 2016 election will conclude that the decades old effort by the Republicans at voter suppression and gerrymandering are what resulted in the 2016 results. 80,000 votes in three states that the Republicans have invested great voter suppression efforts – Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania would have changed the election results. This should have been a major neon sign that winner take all for electoral votes is a bad idea. If proportional EC votes were mandated, third parties would have a chance and our presidential elections might become actual contests. Otherwise, we'll continue to have elections that are between two candidates – worse and worser.

John Puma , July 16, 2019 at 12:36

The proportion of IRA "stories" among total Facebook postings
in the period in question, can be expressed in manner a bit more
readily grasped: on average, one IRA posting appeared among
every 412 million total. For perspective the US population is now
about 330 million.

The FBIs bungling with Crowdstrike information is reminiscent
of its reported 9-11 careless incompetence.

Jill , July 16, 2019 at 13:06

This may be why NPR featured that story:

"Businessman Ed Butowsky filed a lawsuit on Monday that outed FOX News reporter Ellen Ratner was his source for the Seth Rich information.

This comes after Michael Isikoff's report last week that labeled Butowsky as a Russian source."

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/07/breaking-lawsuit-outs-reporter-ellen-ratner-as-source-for-seth-rich-information/

Chet Roman , July 16, 2019 at 13:12

Yahoo's reporter Michael Isikoff is a sock puppet for the CIA/FBI that provided the info to NPR and was one of the first to spread the lies told to him by Steele about Russian interference. He must have tried to head off the lawsuit filed today. Ed Butowsky filed a lawsuit against the liberal media claiming defamation and business disparagement. He claims that Assange told Ellen Ratner (Fox News analyst and sister of Assange's lawyer who passed away) that Seth and Aaron Rich provided the emails to Wikileaks.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/07/15/lawsuit-claims-julian-assange-confirmed-dnc-emails-received-from-seth-rich-not-a-russian-hack/

Kieron , July 16, 2019 at 17:22

I don't think anyone with a couple of brain cells would dismiss the idea that an insider with the DNC having access to delicate, perhaps damaging material, being what seems on the surface, to be the victim of a motiveless murder would ask the question, was there any connection between Seth Rich's demise and the crap storm that ensued after the Wikileaks release. Really hello !

LarcoMarco , July 16, 2019 at 17:46

"NPR's Steve Inskeep talks to Michael Isikoff" – what a predictable farce! "We talked to Deborah Sines, who was the federal prosecutor in charge of the investigation into Seth Rich's death. She was an assistant U.S. attorney in the U.S. attorney's office in the District of Columbia, which prosecutes local murders. And she would see these conspiracy theories about her case circulating on the Web. She was – she wanted to find out where they were coming from."

At least we now know that Seth Rich's death is/was a Federal case. No more claiming the DCPD has jurisdiction. But no disclosures of the contents of Seth Rich's cell phone and laptop.

Eric32 , July 16, 2019 at 10:38

The author seems consumed by this carnival of politicized legalized covert intelligence operations, by people and entities trying to retain money and power.

What's important is that the system hasn't been working for decades, and there's going to be increasingly serious problems, maybe fatal ones, rising if a big overhaul doesn't occur.

Al Pinto , July 16, 2019 at 09:43

The DNC and MSM sold, and sold well, the Russiagate to the general public. Does it really matter, if the "Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election has now come apart at the seams"? Neither the DNC, nor the MSM will report/mention either of the court case, pretty much a blackout for the general public.

Even, if these court cases are widely reported, do you really believe that the majority of the people would change their mind? After almost three years, there's no way that these people will change their mind. The only change that widely reporting these court cases would result in is, that Trump and HRC supporters would hate each other even more.

This Russiagate will be with us pretty much forever, it'll morph in to accusing people of being Russian agents and/or Russian Bots. We already see this taking place and just wait, until next year. It's not going to be pretty

michael , July 16, 2019 at 12:40

Aaron Mate has done a brilliant job researching and debunking Russiagate. Unfortunately for him, he is now ostracized and has to survive on the margins, with other people with critical thinking skills.

Blessthebeasts , July 16, 2019 at 13:28

You're right. The truth doesn't matter, just the BS narrative that has been shoved down our throats for the last few years. It never made any sense to anyone who really thought about it but the media whores just keep spewing total nonsense and they surely won't change their ways now. The fact that the entire crock is really irrelevant to the majority of our citizens doesn't matter to them a bit.

AnneR , July 16, 2019 at 09:42

Thank you again Mr McGovern for another article on this never ending saga. While I hope that sanity begins to dawn among the so-called progressives, I have serious doubts.

1. Neither the BBC World Service nor NPR have mentioned (at least while I've been listening) Judge Friedrich's ruling vis a vis provide the evidence (discovery) to the IRA 12's lawyers or tear up the indictment (essentially). Indeed, I've not heard, on the MSM, anything about those 12 IRA folks employing a lawyer and challenging Mueller's indictment. Silence works as well as obfuscation, lies.

2. The Demrats simply will not let their Russophobia go. I gather (from RT – tut tut I must be an RU bottle) that Ms Harris AIPAC schmoozer, keen and eager lock 'em up and throw away the key, corporate-capitalist crony Kamala has been accusing the Russians of stirring up the controversy surrounding Kaepernick's bending of the knee. The Russians and their bots did it.

3. And then this morning on NPR – a Steve Inskip interview with Michael Isikoff focusing on the Seth Rich "conspiracy theory" and of course the whole thing (or that segment which I could stomach hearing) presumed as a matter of established, and thus true, fact that everything that went wrong for the DNC's HRC campaign was caused by the Russians – for which read Putin. Isikoff was there as an "investigative" journalist for "Yahoo News" – and his "investigation" had shown that the Russians were – who else – behind the conspiracy theory that Seth Rich was killed by HRC thugs in order to keep him permanently quiet about corruption in the DNC. (Corruption – a rather mealy-mouthed way of avoiding bringing into NPR daylight what the DNC were actually doing: determining who would be the Dem candidate willy nilly of who the voters wanted. But this mealy-mouthedness is fully in keeping with NPR's basic silence on what Wikileaks revealed via that insider download.)

Orwellian. Propaganda at its Bernays, Goebbels best. Despair . This business is *not* going away. The Demrats – both in DC and their bourgeois/progressive supporters have far too much invested in the whole confabulation for them to admit that the former deliberately lied and the latter were willing? hoodwinked.

Ray McGovern , July 16, 2019 at 14:57

Dear AnneR,

Thanks for your comment. I would like it if somehow "despair," could be disallowed.

There are enough of us, after all. And, as Annie Dillard put it, "There never was anybody but us."

I also take some inspiration from the dismal-sounding, yet somehow uplifting words of I. F. Stone:

"The only kinds of fights worth fighting are those you're going to lose, because somebody has to fight them and lose and lose and lose until someday, somebody who believes as you do wins."

THE CHALLENGE IS TO ACCEPT THAT, AND FIND JOY IN TRYING -- AND EVEN IN LOSING.

I believe the losing does not last forever; think we all need to do our part in the "interim."

Best regards,

Ray

DW Bartoo , July 16, 2019 at 19:44

That sums things up precisely, Ray.

None of us may live to see a complete turn-around, yet it is the honest effort to encourage and build the foundation for that fundamental systemic change to conscious and principled human awareness which is the measure we must make of ourselves.

Your sense of moral presence, Ray, is very much appreciated.

It serves as inspiration for all, and especially the young, who already understand, and encourages, as example, those who are coming to understand.

DW

AnneR , July 17, 2019 at 08:33

Dear Mr McGovern – thank you for reading and replying to my comment.

And, yes, I do understand the objection to despair – though not, might I add, any thought that its frank expression be expunged!

Were it only the whole Russiagate fabrication, delusions, time and money waste (oh well, only taxpayers' money) and fallout that was so dreadfully wrong, being heinously enacted. Indeed were it all that our taxes were being wasted on.

Perhaps that's it – Russiagate while distracting from the things that the DNC and HRC did, said, *also* makes for good deflection from the war crimes we are committing, the never ending imperialist warmongering we are engaged in, from the fact that many Demrats voted for those nice tax breaks given to the wealthiest tiers in our society, that many of those Demrats voted to hand over to the MIC *even more* loot even as the Pentagon can't account for the billions, or whatever fantastikal amount, it has already received over the years, deflection from the fact that despite such a "good" economy increasing numbers of people are living ever more economically precarious lives, rents rise astronomically, healthcare is a joke (or would be were its lack not so serious for so many). And that's not to mention the realities of climate change or the continuing (and MSM ignored) 70 plus year plight of Palestinians, among so many others.

My late husband used to tell me to write to NPR, the BBC, to let them know that they weren't codding everyone with their disinformation, non-information, lack of objectivity – their propaganda. And I did, often and used to ask for a response. Did I even get those? You must be joking

AnneR , July 17, 2019 at 14:08

In case someone might think that I expected either the BBC or NPR to alter their ways because of my "letters" (interestingly the BBC only allows/ed for around 1000 characters or something equally useless) – no. But when (in the case of the BBC) you can tick the "please reply" box and get total silence, not even a "thank you for your blah blah we shan't pay any attention to your complaints ," in response it is pretty frustrating.

As for NPR – I stopped our contributions. Why would we *pay* for the privilege of being propagandized? I just wish we had stopped them years earlier

Anyway, thank you Mr McGovern for your continuing coverage of this whole affair. I just wish my late partner in life and love had known of this website.

ML , July 16, 2019 at 09:24

Each morning when I arise, I get my coffee and settle down to read Consortium News. I also make a habit of a quick perusal of what the stenographers are jawing about on CNN today, there is a real doozy smearing Assange. The spinners are working overtime to patch over all the holes in their hoax story. I couldn't get through the whole thing because it's another smear piece and a long one including the old saw that Assange smeared feces on the Ecuadorian embassy's walls. I had to stop reading. Gosh, I can't abide those people. Thanks Ray, for telling the truth. We are drowning in $h** out there in la-la land. CN offers a much-needed dose of reality medicine. Thank you kindly, all.

Skip Scott , July 16, 2019 at 10:19

Here's a good essay by Caitlin Johnstone regarding the Assange hit-piece.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/new-cnn-assange-smear-piece-is-amazingly-dishonest-even-for-cnn-e7c361d98639

Marko , July 16, 2019 at 07:31

Even worse news for the Russiahoaxers is the recent revelation , documented in a lawsuit , that Ellen Ratner , sister of deceased Wikileaks' lawyer Michael Ratner, met with Assange in the fall of 2016 and was told by him that Aaron and Seth Rich provided the DNC leaks to Wikileaks. Ed Butowsky was made aware of this , with instructions by Ms. Ratner for him to relay the information to the Rich family. When he did so , in December 2016 , he was told by Joel Rich , Seth's father , that he was already aware of his sons' involvement.

This is no longer conspiracy talk , folks. Ed Butowsky is not dumb enough to make these claims on court documents without knowing he can back them up. Shit is about to get real for Mueller and the DNC.

"BREAKING: Lawsuit Outs Reporter Ellen Ratner as Source for Seth Rich Information" @ Gateway Pundit

Skip Scott , July 16, 2019 at 08:43

Wow! Thanks Marko. Here's the link.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/07/breaking-lawsuit-outs-reporter-ellen-ratner-as-source-for-seth-rich-information/

DW Bartoo , July 16, 2019 at 09:37

Well, Skip Scott, either this revelation will put "paid" to the "Russia-did-it!" charade, or else the Voracious Memory Hole will act like a giant black hole and the event horizon will be swallowed into total nothingness as a new Middle-Eastern Adventure captures the hearts and minds of the happy warriors and consumers of U$ Imperialism.

Whatever happens, it will be wholey interesting times ahead.

DW

jmg , July 16, 2019 at 10:01

There was a related, extensive 2018 interview about Butowsky's private investigation into the Seth Rich case to help the family, what they found, and what happened (the DNC assigned someone to represent the family, etc.; the mentioned lawsuits were later dropped/dismissed). It included, without naming Ratner, the unverified mention: "his friend came back from London with information that he said he wanted to get to the Rich family." Since this alleged private message appears to be not only doubtful, but of course also not confirmed by WikiLeaks, we can't really know if it happened or not.

Ed Butowsky Sits Down With Gateway Pundit for First Interview After Being Sued by Family in Seth Rich Murder Mystery -- March 19, 2018
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/03/ed-butowsky-sits-first-interview-gateway-pundit-sued-family-seth-rich-murder-mystery/

Eric32 , July 16, 2019 at 11:17

I wonder why Seth's murder hasn't been solved?
I wonder why there's almost no media attention paid?

O Society , July 16, 2019 at 17:32

Marko, polo! Here it is:

Seth Rich, disgruntled DNC worker, blows the whistle on HillBillary Clinton rigging the Democratic presidential primary against Bernie Sanders, so he gives data supporting his discovery of rigging to Wikileaks. Rich got the data on a thumdrive downloaded at DNC HQ itself.

No Russians, no hacking, just a whistleblower on the fraud ironically called US "democracy." We've all seen the data Rich leaked. Emails detailing HillBillary Clinton's graft and fraud and collusion against Sanders.

No wonder no other candidates besides Sanders ran against HillBillary, for they all knew the fix was in from its inception!

I dunno who killed Seth Rich, but I do know the Democratic party stole the election from Bernie, then projected its own crimes onto Russia, same way a kid projects his own crime of breaking a cookie jar on his brother when he tells Momma "He dit it –> He ate the cookies and broke the jar!" Meanwhile, there's chocolate smeared all over the DNC's face.

We have evidence for this, the leaked emails themselves tell the story

Gregory Herr , July 16, 2019 at 18:15

Seth Rich copied and leaked the DNC e-mails and was murdered for it. For this to become irrefutable common knowledge will be quite one godsend of a reality check. Maddow might not be able to get out of bed for weeks.

Repeat after me Rachel there was no Russian hack, there was no Russian hack, there was no Russian hack

jmg , July 16, 2019 at 07:13

From the Brennan–Comey–Rogers assessment/opinion (January 6, 2017):

"We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence. . . .

"- High confidence generally indicates that judgments are based on high-quality information from multiple sources. High confidence in a judgment does not imply that the assessment is a fact or a certainty; such judgments might be wrong.

"- Moderate confidence generally means that the information is credibly sourced and plausible but not of sufficient quality or corroborated sufficiently to warrant a higher level of confidence."

Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

-- -- –

"When they say they have 'high confidence', that means they don't have any evidence!"
-- Bill Binney, former NSA Technical Director

DW Bartoo , July 16, 2019 at 07:10

Thank you, Ray McGovern for this splendid article laying out the facts which make clear the absurdities of these last several years. One hopes, now that the "Russia-did-it" canard is fully exposed, by US courts, that the truth may finally get through, over or around, the media wall of enforced ignorance and Mueller hero-worship, and reach the ears and eyes of the people.

Should that actually happen, it might even be possible that other truth, long subject to media manipulation and distortion, the cases of Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning come readily to mind, could be seen in the honest light of day after an almost eight year protracted nightmare of media driven deceit, psychological torture, and deliberately vicious character assassination is revealed, in Assange's case, as it might well be, by Nils Melzer's report to the UN.

The legacy U$ corporate media have much to answer for, from promulgating lies that led to war, to missile attacks, and to brutal economic sanctions, a form of economic warfare, to efforts to start a new Cold War, and to aggrandize intelligence agencies which have sought to pervert justice and to illegally influence the political process by falsely accusing, on the flimsy words of partisan political operatives, another nation of the very actions those agencies have used, repeatedly and for many decades,to destroy the political processes of other nations, including the very nation singled out to take the blame for Hillary Clinton's abysmal and pathetic failure in the 2016 election.

What a waste