Reprint of Intellectual Material

With Comments

Michael Weddle
Jul 16 · 40 min read
One would think at least one highly-paid US journalist would have the courage to ask Craig Murray a question!

CAMPAIGN 2016, INTELLIGENCE, RUSSIA, RUSSIAGATE, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, WIKILEAKS

Concord Management and the End of Russiagate?

July 12, 2019 • 88 Comments

Save

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has just shut down half of Robert Mueller’s Russian-interference case, writes Daniel Lazare.

By Daniel Lazare
Special to Consortium News

Don’t look now, but a federal judge in Washington, D.C., has just shut down half of Robert Mueller’s Russian-interference case.

In February 2018, the special prosecutor indicted a St. Petersburg troll farm called the Internet Research Agency along with two other companies, their owner, Yevgeniy Prigozhin, and 12 employees. The charge: fraud, traveling to the United States under false pretenses, and using social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to “sow discord” and “interfere in US political and electoral processes without detection of their Russian affiliation.”

One-time home in St. Petersburg, Russia, of Internet Research Agency, an “online influence” concern. (WikiMedia Commons)

The charge was both legally dubious and heavy-handed, a case of using a sledge hammer to swat a fly. But Mueller went even further in his report, an expurgated version of which was made public in April. No longer just a Russian company, the IRA was now an arm of the Russian government. “[T]he Special Counsel’s investigation,” it declared on page one, “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.”

“Prigozhin,” the report added, referring to the IRA owner, “is widely reported to have ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.” A few pages later, it said that the IRA’s efforts “constituted ‘active measures’ … a term that typically refers to operations conducted by Russian security services aimed at influencing the course of international affairs.”

Thus, the IRA played a major role in the vast Kremlin conspiracy to alter the outcome of the 2016 election and install Donald Trump in office. But now Judge Dabney Friedrich has ordered Mueller to stop pushing such stories because they’re unfair to Concord Management and Consulting, another Prigozhin company, which astonished the legal world in May 2018 by hiring an expensive Washington law firm and demanding its day in court.

Silent on IRA-Kremlin Connection

Judge Dabney Friedrich. (Twitter)

Contrary to internet chatter, Friedrich did not offer an opinion as to whether the IRA-Kremlin connection is true or false. Rather, she told the special prosecutor to keep quiet because such statements go beyond the scope of the original indictment and are therefore prejudicial to the defendant. But it may be a distinction without a difference since the only evidence that Mueller puts forth in the public version of his report is a New York Times article from February 2018 entitled “Yevgeny Prigozhin, Russian Oligarch Indicted by US, Is Known as ‘Putin’s Cook.’”

It’s a case of trial by press clip that should have been laughed out of court — and now, more or less, it is. Without the IRA, the only argument left in Mueller’s brief is that Russia stole some 28,000 emails and other electronic documents from Democratic National Committee computers and then passed them along to WikiLeaks, which published them to great fanfare in July 2016.

But as Consortium News pointed out the day the Mueller report came out, that’s dubious as well. [See “The ‘Guccifer 2.0’ Gaps in Mueller’s Full Report,” April 18.] The reason: it rests on a timeline that doesn’t make sense:

  • June 12, 2016: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange announces that “leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton” were on the way.
  • June 15: Guccifer 2.0, allegedly a stand-in for Russian military intelligence, goes on line to claim credit for the hack.
  • June 22: Guccifer and WikiLeaks establish contact.
  • July 14: Guccifer sends WikiLeaks an encrypted file.
  • July 18: WikiLeaks confirms that it’s opened it up.
  • July 22: The group releases a giant email cache indicating that the DNC rigged the nominating process in favor of Hillary Clinton and against Bernie Sanders.

But why would Assange announce the leaked emails on June 12 before hearing from the source on June 22? Was he clairvoyant? Why would he release a massive file just eight days after receiving it and as a little as four days after opening it up? How could that be enough time to review the contents and ensure they were genuine? “If a single one of those emails had been shown to be maliciously altered,” blogger Mark F. McCarty points out, “WikiLeaks’s reputation would have been in tatters.” Quite right. So if Mueller’s chronology doesn’t hold up, then Assange’s original statement that “our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party” still stands — which it plainly does.

Going Up in Smoke

Bottom line: Russiagate is going up in smoke. The claim that Russian military intelligence fed thousands of emails to WikiLeaks doesn’t stand up to scrutiny while Mueller is not only unable to a prove a connection between the Internet Research Agency and the Kremlin but is barred from even discussing it, according to Friedrich’s ruling, without risking a charge of contempt. After 22 months of investigating the ins and outs of Russian interference, Mueller seems to have finally come up dry.

Reed Smith’s Pittsburgh office. (Wikimedia Commons)

“Revenge of the oligarchs” might be a good headline for this story. The IRA indictment initially seemed to be a no-lose proposition for Mueller. He got to look good in the press, the media got to indulge in yet another round of Russia-bashing, while, best of all, no one had to prove a thing. “Mueller’s allegations will never be tested in court,” noted Andrew C. McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor turned pundit for the rightwing National Review. “That makes his indictment more a political statement than a charging instrument.”

Then came the unexpected. Concord Management hired Reed Smith, a top-flight law firm with offices around the world, and demanded to be heard. The move was “a real head-scratcher,” one Washington attorneytold Buzzfeed, because Concord was beyond the reach of U.S. law and therefore had nothing to fear from an indictment and nothing to gain, apparently, from going to court. But then the firm demanded to exercise its right of discovery, meaning that it wanted access to Mueller’s immense investigative file. Blindsided, Mueller’s requested a delay “on the astonishing ground,” according to McCarthy, “that the defendant has not been properly served — notwithstanding that the defendant has shown up in court and asked to be arraigned.”

Prigozhin: Forced Mueller to show his hand. (YouTube)

Prigozhin was forcing the special prosecutor to show what he’s got, McCarthy went on, at zero risk to himself since he was not on U.S. soil. What was once a no-lose proposition for Mueller was suddenly a no-lose proposition for Putin’s unexpectedly clever cook.

Now Mueller is in an even worse pickle because he’s barred from mentioning a major chunk of his report. What will he discuss if Democrats succeed in getting him to testify before the House intelligence and judiciary committees next week — the weather? If his team goes forward with the Concord prosecution, he’ll risk having to turn over sensitive information while involving himself in a legal tangle that could go on for years, all without any conceivable payoff. If he drops it, the upshot will be a public-relations disaster of the first order.

As skeptics have pointed out, the IRA’s social-media campaign was both more modest and more ineffectual then the Mueller report’s over-the-top language about a “sweeping and systematic” conspiracy would suggest. Yet after Facebook Vice President Rob Goldman tweeted that “the majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election,” he was forced to beg for forgiveness like a defendant in a Moscow show trial for daring to play down the magnitude of the crime.

But it wasn’t Goldman who shaved the truth. Rather, it was Mueller. Thanks to the unexpected appearance of Concord Management, he’s now paying the price.

Daniel Lazare is the author of “The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy” (Harcourt Brace, 1996) and other books about American politics. He has written for a wide variety of publications from The Nation to Le Monde Diplomatiqueand blogs about the Constitution and related matters at Daniellazare.com.

If you value this original article, please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.

COMMENTS:

Post navigation

← WATCH THE REPLAY: Nils Melzer, Aaron Mate’, Mike Gravel on CN Live! Premiere

Israel’s Involvement in Libya’s Civil War →

88 comments for “Concord Management and the End of Russiagate?”

  1. SteveK9
  2. July 15, 2019 at 15:35
  3. The massive interference: more than half after the election. Equal parts in favor of and opposed to Clinton and Trump, and including ‘puppy pictures’. This was a (dangerous) farce from the beginning. And, what that means is that no one cares that it is nonsense. People are well into believing what they want to believe. In fact, evidence never made a difference from the beginning. It’s more than a little scary considering just how stupid and uninformed the American electorate is, to believe this nonsense.
  1. John Puma
  2. July 15, 2019 at 15:10
  3. Re: “With liberty and justice for all gangsters.”
  4. The US spent decades, $trillions and millions of lives to make the USSR be “just like us.”
  5. I pronounce the bloody process an unequivocal success!
  • John Puma
  • July 15, 2019 at 15:17
  • Note: quoted passage above is from a comment below.
    That is, my comment was misplaced.
  • To continue, a quote from the article: “the only evidence that Mueller puts forth in the public version of his report is a New York Times article from February 2018 entitled “Yevgeny Prigozhin, Russian Oligarch Indicted by US, Is Known as ‘Putin’s Cook.’ ”
  • I was not aware that Judith Miller had been rehired by the NYT.
  1. SocraticGadfly
  2. July 14, 2019 at 18:23
  3. Cmon, Daniel. You know not all of VIPS signed off on that, but … apparently Binney and McGovern have you catching a Curveball too, just as Thomas Drake put it: https://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2018/08/shirtlost-dumbshit-zach-haller-actual.html
  • Clark M Shanahan
  • July 15, 2019 at 13:31
  • “You know not all of VIPS signed off on that”
  • Gadfly, please expound.
  1. J-Vo
  2. July 14, 2019 at 17:15
  3. It appears that no contrary comments will be allowed. This site is heavily censored by the left and therefore has zero credibility as only one side is being heard.
  4. How commie is that?
  • ML
  • July 15, 2019 at 14:36
  • Comment moderating and posting feature doesn’t appear to be working today J-Vo. Go troll elsewhere.
  • Realist
  • July 15, 2019 at 18:39
  • The people that were trying to post unsuccessfully got blocked either by some “bug” in the program or a hack by some troublemaker who wants to disrupt the free exchange of ideas, not by a “commie” CN editorial board. The ones, like me, who got blocked (evidenced by the “test” posts which could not be deleted, there were probably many more who just gave up trying to post rather than periodically testing the system) were not targeted right-wing dissenters disliked by “commies.” Usually all sides are heard in these comments, which does not mean some other reader won’t take you to task if they disagree with you. There is a moderation process, which seems to kick in randomly and aggravates a lot of readers, but no one has presented any evidence of a systematic bias. The moderation process usually just slows down the posting of your comments as they are read by a human moderator who checks for slander, obscenities, and the like; it rarely blocks them by what might be called censorship. This was not that over the weekend.
  1. Nathan Mulcahy
  2. July 14, 2019 at 15:07
  3. I only post comments occasionally but frequently, they are not published. The latest one was my response to Ray McGovern, whom I hold in high esteem. In my comment I had pointed out that the Dems have no moral high ground to impeach Trump based on the current Mexico border crisis. After all, they, together with the Reps, have created the political and humanitarian crisis that makes the people from South America flee their country.
  4. I hope that some commentators are not more equal than others on CN. That would be a shame
  1. skip
  2. July 14, 2019 at 07:07
  • Chris N
  • July 15, 2019 at 10:17
  • test
  • DW Bartoo
  • July 15, 2019 at 12:42
  • It seems that many articles here, at CN, cannot be accessed.
  • “503 Service Unavailable ”
  • “No server is available to handle this request”
  • Hopefully, things may return to normal soon.
  1. Realist
  2. July 13, 2019 at 21:23
  1. mike k
  2. July 13, 2019 at 18:01
  3. Shewed move by the Russkie. A surprising move worthy of Putin himself. Caught the false accuser with his pant down.
  1. Realist
  2. July 13, 2019 at 16:55
  3. .
  1. Mark McCarty
  2. July 13, 2019 at 12:39
  3. But wait — there actually was a REAL CRIME!
  4. The Mueller indictment pinpoints 13 ads (out of the 3,000 or so that IRA bought!) that advocated for Trump or against Hillary, during an election season. These are technically illegal, as foreigners are not allowed to purchase campaign advertising. If these cost the average amount that IRA paid for its Facebook ads, we can guesstimate their total cost as — wait for it — $500!
  5. Damn, I sure am glad that Mueller has nailed this rampant threat to our Democracy!
  6. How much you wanna bet that those crafty Russkies also bought a few ads advocated for Hillary or against Trump — which Mueller doesn’t mention because they don’t fit his narrative?
  7. Mueller also indicted for an identity theft that enabled the IRA to be paid by PayPal. The victim of said theft experienced no known inconvenience, and hadn’t even known that it had happened.
  8. He also charged two IRA employees with visa fraud because they had declared a trip to the US in 2014 to be for pleasure, whereas they also were supposedly checking out the business environment in the US for IRA. Granted, they did visit several national parks. Perhaps they were trying to determine whether bears would respond to Facebook ads.
  9. And this was our “New Pearl Harbor”.
  10. Unaccountably, the VP for Facebook, who had examined every Facebook ad that IRA had purchased, tweeted that the IRA’s activities in the US had little if anything to do with influencing the election.
  11. “Most of the coverage of Russian meddling involves their attempt to effect the outcome of the 2016 US election. I have seen all of the Russian ads and I can say very definitively that swaying the election was *NOT* the main goal.”
  12. I’m sure, though, that he has since been strongly encouraged to get his thinking straight.
  13. But wait — there actually was a REAL CRIME!
  14. The Mueller indictment pinpoints 13 ads (out of the 3,000 or so that IRA bought!) that advocated for Trump or against Hillary, during an election season. These are technically illegal, as foreigners are not allowed to purchase campaign advertising. If these cost the average amount that IRA paid for its Facebook ads, we can guesstimate their total cost as — wait for it — $500!
  15. Damn, I sure am glad that Mueller has nailed this rampant threat to our Democracy!
  16. How much you wanna bet that those crafty Russkies also bought a few ads advocated for Hillary or against Trump — which Mueller doesn’t mention because they don’t fit his narrative?
  17. Mueller also indicted for an identity theft that enabled the IRA to be paid by PayPal. The victim of said theft experienced no known inconvenience, and hadn’t even known that it had happened.
  18. He also charged two IRA employees with visa fraud because they had declared a trip to the US in 2014 to be for pleasure, whereas they also were supposedly checking out the business environment in the US for IRA. Granted, they did visit several national parks. Perhaps they were trying to determine whether bears would respond to Facebook ads.
  19. And this was our “New Pearl Harbor”.
  20. Unaccountably, the VP for Facebook, who had examined every Facebook ad that IRA had purchased, tweeted that the IRA’s activities in the US had little if anything to do with influencing the election.
  21. “Most of the coverage of Russian meddling involves their attempt to effect the outcome of the 2016 US election. I have seen all of the Russian ads and I can say very definitively that swaying the election was *NOT* the main goal.”
  22. I’m sure, though, that he has since been strongly encouraged to get his thinking straight.
  23. https://caucus99percent.com/content/hilarity-alert-moon-alabama-explains-what-indicted-russian-trolls-were-really-doing-0
  1. Hal_S
  2. July 13, 2019 at 11:39
  3. If Mueller/DOJ testify at the upcoming joint-Congressional hearing, they could be subject to contempt of court if they state or imply that “Russian Government election interference via Facebook” is a proven fact.
  4. Curious if “imply” includes failing to correct a false impression when a Congressperson asks a question that assumes that “Russian Government election interference via Facebook” is a proven fact.
  • Calgacus
  • July 13, 2019 at 14:34
  • That idea that he could be subject to contempt of court for speaking to Congress as in the passage in the article
    “What will he discuss if Democrats succeed in getting him to testify before the House intelligence and judiciary committees next week — the weather? If his team goes forward with the Concord prosecution, he’ll risk having to turn over sensitive information while involving himself in a legal tangle that could go on for years, all without any conceivable payoff. ”
  • Sounds legally dubious to me. After all, Congress has subpoena power too. He could be in the position of one branch of government demanding he talk, another demanding he not. Granted, it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. But my guess is that the Congressional inquiry would legally supersede the court order, especially if in a closed session as he was only ordered to not speak publicly.
  1. Junaid Abbasi
  2. July 13, 2019 at 10:55
  3. Can Turkey menace America by Russian S-400 Missile System. America is afraid about Turkey to deal for buying Russian S-400 defence missile system. Because if Turkey admits the S-400 missile system into own air defence they will be more strong. So America faces difficulties to control the establishment of Turkey government. America is afraid of someone who grabbed power. That’s why the U.S put sanctions on those countries that they work hard to respond against America
  4. Can Turkey menace America by Russian S-400 Missile System
  1. Nathan Mulcahy
  2. July 13, 2019 at 10:39
  3. This may be old news to most CN readers but nevertheless, I wanted to share this excellent reporting on this issue by Aaron Mate.
  4. https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/07/05/crowdstrikeout_muellers_own_report_undercuts_its_core_russia-meddling_claims.html
  1. Nathan Mulcahy
  2. July 13, 2019 at 09:54
  3. Don’t underestimate the level of cognitive dissonance, TDS (Trump derangement syndrome) and utter lack of critical thinking by the “librals” and the mass. They will believe anything and everything they are told to believe by the corporate presstitutes on behalf of the deep state.
  1. DW Bartoo
  2. July 13, 2019 at 09:32
  3. As was revealed yesterday (Friday, June 12, 2019), on CN Live!, Mueller will not be testifying before the House intelligence and judiciary committees next week.
  4. Clearly, Mueller never wanted to testify and, very likely, still does not want to do so.
  5. Will rumors now take wing that Judge Friedrich, a Trump appointee, is trying to suppress Mueller’s testimony, trying to hide the truth, stymie justice, and support a vile Russian oligarch?
  6. What will the “liberal” legacy media say?
  7. What will the legacy political duopoly do?
  8. Both the Ds and the Rs want Russia demonized, both would welcome a war with Iran.
  9. And, we are deep into election season … and have not touched bottom yet.
  10. Well, the Powers That Be always have Epstein.
  11. If Russiagate cannot bring about Impeachment, then Epstein might,
  12. Of course, if pursuing Epstein were to make Trump attack Iran (MTAI), then all the Impeachment lust would transmogrify into happy war lust and a substantial killing would be made.
  13. However, were this much sought bipartisan objective realized, the whole thing might Acosta lot more than U$ oligarchs might imagine.
  14. Especially so, were Russia and China to object to an all-out U$ attack on Iran and come to Iran’s aid, then it IS very possible that the great wish of Xian-Zionist End-Timers would be realized.
  15. Which would surely be a blast.
  16. There might be some irony were the three religions which claim the same, sole deity as their very might collude/collide to put an end to collective existence, yet I am not at all certain who might savor (no, chell speck, “savior” is not the term this sentence requires) such ironic twists. Possible survivors might well have other, more urgent, concerns.
  17. The question is, should any of us have any concerns about how things (and ourselves) have so obviously been manipulated to bring us to this “place”?
  18. It might be argued that it all is mere accident, vagaries of capricious fate.
  19. Yet, blithe, calculated intent cannot be dismissed as beyond possible or even less than likely.
  20. Which raises one last question, who has benefited and expects to benefit even more gloriously?
  21. Bonus question.
  22. Do lemmings (or did dodo birds) engage in any discussion before plunging into the abyss?
  • Realist
  • July 13, 2019 at 15:57
  • So many possible paths to self-destruction.
  • So much urgency by the fools to choose one.
  • I doubt they’ll like the abyss any more than they did existence.
  • Will they be glad or sad if the Taoists are right about it all being endless cycles?
  • Bailey
  • July 13, 2019 at 23:45
  • Mueller risks committing perjury charges if he sticks to the narrative that he put in his report because so much of it was made up. He stated unequivocally that Russia interfered with the election, but the only evidence he offered was the IC report that people mistakenly say, “all 17 intelligence agencies agree that Russia interfered with the election” when it was just Brennan saying that he had ‘high confidence’ that Russia did the deed. Plus there are so many other areas where Mueller did not provide proof. He said that two people from Trump’s campaign took the DNC computer files to London where they gave it to Wikileaks. No proof.
  • The worst part of the Mueller report is that he left people with the idea that Trump obstructed justice. He said that his report does not exonerated Trump, but he did not say that he was guilty of it. Imagine a prosecutor leaving a jury with that impression. The jury would have to say not guilty. Mueller left Trump with no option to defend himself. But that was exactly the reason Mueller did that.
  1. t
  2. July 13, 2019 at 08:46
  3. test
  1. DW Bartoo
  2. July 13, 2019 at 08:13
  3. Refuting the long-standing concerns that many of us may have, regarding the intentions of high governmental officials, which several comments here reflect, Judge Dabney Friedrich, on page 19 of her order, makes this assertion;
  4. “Government officers are presumed to act in good faith when exercising their authority …”
  5. Blanket assertions of this sort may well cover a multitude of major sins or minor infractions.
  6. Yet, why would good U$ians, instructed from birth to blindly believe this nation most exceptional, the very embodiment of goodness and purity, ever come to see reason for concern or even doubt, if such assumptions are never subject to question, even when consistent patterns of “official” behavior, over a long and sustained period of time, result in outcomes of dubious worth or actual harm, of wars begun on the basis of official lies, of illegal surveillance of everyone on a massive scale, of the punishment of whistle-blowers and publishers who reveal crimes against humanity while the perpetrators of those crimes not only are not punished but are rewarded, lavishly, and allowed to
    continue exercising power (and so on, to apallingly greedy and destructive “ends”)?
  7. As I said in a previous comment, Judge Friedrich’s order is well worth a serious read, for it spans a amazingly wide realm, ranging from the deep depths of pathos to soaring peaks of knee-slapping hilarity.
  8. Take a peek.
  9. (But if you do, be sure to put one back.)
  1. DW Bartoo
  2. July 13, 2019 at 07:25
  3. A most interesting article.
  4. Reading through Judge Friedrich’s order is a most useful activity, well worth the little effort and time required to do so.
  5. One discovers that “… no trial date has been set in this case.” Page 4
  6. The “case” being the trial of Concord Management and Consulting LLC, the entity behind IRA.
  7. The Roger Stone case is mentioned on page 17.
  8. From the Order:
    “In Stone, however, a trial date has been set.” Page 18.
  9. Why is the Stone case mentioned?
  10. Reading the order will answer that question.
  11. Basically, the education provided by the order about prejudicial statements by officers of the court is thoroughly useful.
  12. “In short, the court concludes that the government violated Rule 57.7 by making …statements that linked the defendants’ alleged activities to the Russian government and provided an opinion about the defendants’ guilt and the evidence against them.” Page 10
  13. Even though (prejudicial) “statements” may be forgotten by the time of the trial in cases not subject to the publicity and media interest found in this case.
  14. Why has no trial date been set in this case, as yet?
  15. Clearly, Mueller (and other government officials, including the Attorney General) are now put on notice that they must exercise caution in their public statements around this case.
  16. Just as clearly, the media has no such limitation on the implications they may push as conclusive “evidence” of “collusion”, connection, or successful efforts to sew “discord” or disillusionment.
  17. Presumably, the circus will continue until there is a trial and, if the last two years may be considered as “evidence”, the show will go on regardless of whatever verdict the trial might deliver.
  18. I do wish the Russia-did-it!!! madness and deceit would cease yet, although a large portion of the public seem weary of it, it still is a cash cow quite golden and the cud-chewers display no apparent weariness with their rumination.
  19. Again, I urge everyone to read Judge Dabney Friedrich’s order, it is not terribly long, however it is jam-packed with delectable tidbits of insight and true gems of enlightenment.
  20. Yes, the language is legalese, the references many, but the slight uphill slog is very much worth the vista laid out.
  1. Tom
  2. July 13, 2019 at 04:34
  3. People of the real left saw this as nothing more than the MIC wanting another Cold War and know that it would be used against the left to stop any anti war progress
  4. Russia gate was useful for so many things including destruction of freedom of the press
  1. Junaid Abbasi
  2. July 13, 2019 at 00:29
  3. Can America Afraid due to Russia Interference in Iran. Russia steady gives support to Iran against United State pressure. America wants from Iran to withdraw your plan to generate uranium for making nuclear weapons. But Iran has not been able to increase uranium production
  4. Can America Afraid due to Russia Interference in Iran.
  • Tom
  • July 13, 2019 at 04:37
  • The USA wants war with Iran
  • And all for Israel
  • Epstein is part of this
  • Gregory Herr
  • July 13, 2019 at 17:08
  • The Epstein affair “has all the hallmarks of a major espionage case, possibly tied to Israel…That Epstein was perceived as being intelligence-linked was made clear in Acosta’s comments when being cleared by the Trump transition team. He was asked “Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” … “Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had ‘been told’ to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. ‘I was told Epstein belonged to intelligence and to leave it alone.’”
  • by Philip Giraldi
    https://israelpalestinenews.org/giraldi-did-pedophile-jeffrey-epstein-work-for-mossad/
  • More than a pedophile friend of the Clintons?
  • Nathan Mulcahy
  • July 13, 2019 at 10:07
  • It’s all about the Benjamins that the zionists pay to both political parties in the US to fight wars against Middle East countries for the benefit of Israel.
  1. christina garcia
  2. July 12, 2019 at 21:57
  3. at this point, in our history, 2016 really doesn’t matter. What matters is djt and his people. Cages, raids, financial deals. We are a country of I don’t even know what. Our collective history does not matter anymore, because we all put our views based on what we want to see/hear. There are are certain truths and facts, and opinions, but when one obfuscates those three , one winds up with nothing but confusion. For an example, how can one convince a person that the moonlanding happened ,when there are so many people who claim, the moonlanding did not happen? This all is not cool. and I don’t think it serves anyone of us if we stick to our own belief system.
  • Tom
  • July 13, 2019 at 04:38
  • Kids in cages started under Obama
  • Stygg
  • July 13, 2019 at 16:56
  • He has a (D) after his name though, which for some reason makes it okay.
  1. David H
  2. July 12, 2019 at 18:17
  3. Does “prejudicial to the defendant” mean the same thing as prejudiced against the defendant?
  • Sam F
  • July 12, 2019 at 21:53
  • Legal slang “prejudicial to the defendant” means that the effect of such testimony would prejudge the defendant, having a tendency to influence a decision improperly. Of course all federal judges are corrupt and prejudiced, so it really means that the testimony might push a jury the opposite way that the judge would push them.
  • It is only those who agree with a judicial decision who entertain the illusion that it is not corrupt. All judges are political party operatives, and this billionaire “defendant” certainly must have made generous contributions to the Repubs. Clearly he paid to ensure that a Trump appointee would decide a case about Trump. …with Liberty and Justice for gangsters.
  • DavidH
  • July 13, 2019 at 19:21
  • Thank YOU!!!!!
  • Duke
  • July 14, 2019 at 17:03
  • Whatever it takes … so long as Trump and his supporters WIN!
  • That is the name of the game …. beat your opponent and keep on winning …
  • No one is better at winning than our great president Donald J. Trump.
  1. JWalters
  2. July 12, 2019 at 17:33
  3. Another great CN article. Here’s a very lucid, entertaining interview of prize-winning reporter Aaron Maté by political comedian Jimmy Dore. They shred the Mueller report.
    “Mueller Repeatedly Contradicts Himself & Undermines Russiagate”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52P7G7AHiDg
  1. Stan W.
  2. July 12, 2019 at 13:55
  3. The myth regarding Russian influence in the 2016 election that enabled Donald Trump to “steal” the presidency from Hillary Clinton would make a good sequel to a movie from 1966. Its title: “THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING! THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING!”
  1. Jeff Harrison
  2. July 12, 2019 at 12:33
  3. The one thing I’d like to know is: did Mueller ever provide the requested discovery documents or not?
  1. Ray McGovern
  2. July 12, 2019 at 11:20
  3. BRAVO, Dan. AND, as you aware, the “hacking half” of Mueller’s magnum opus also cannot bear close scrutiny.
  4. Remember where you heard this first, “Current and former intelligence officials” tell me that Mueller has asked his mother to write a note to be excused from the field trip to Congress next Thursday, the 17th.
  5. In my view, the only sympathy Mueller should be able to elicit at this point is the cruel reality that he chose to perform one last job for the Deep State after he had reached the age of statutory senility. His handlers will try to prop him up to the extent possible, but the die is now cast. The whipping-up of Russia-gate can now be seen — at least by consortium news readers — as a “best-defense-is-a-good-offensive” operation to obfuscate the reality of Deep-State-gate.
  6. Hard to believe, but it is possible that the dumb Dem leaders still — to this day — believe their story-line. How else to account for the incredible denseness of Pelosi and Nadler, both of whom should be down at the southern border rather than fiddling on a rusty Russia-gate Stradivarius — fiddling while little kids burn. They ought to do their Constitutional duty to impeach — not on the basis of evidence-less Russia-gate charges — but because the President is treading heavily on KIDS, as well as the Constitution.
  7. Let’s hear more from Tulsi Gabbard.
  8. Again, great job, Dan. I can almost see Bob Parry smiling.
  9. Ray
  • JWalters
  • July 12, 2019 at 17:46
  • I suspect the Dems are still trying to bail out this obviously leaky, sinking ship because their financial puppetmasters are directing them to. Trump appears to be giving them so much of what they want (Jerusalem, Golan heights, tax breaks), that they want him to win again. If he truly interferes with their plans for more war, they’ll deal with that then.
  • I agree on Tulsi. And only the candidates refusing corporate money can be trusted. And those are probably treading cautiously on this to avoid getting knocked out of the battle prematurely.
  • Chet Roman
  • July 12, 2019 at 18:15
  • You’ve been right all along Ray. Appreciate all your accurate investigating and reporting.
  • However, I must disagree with your suggestion of impeachment on two phony issues: kids and the constitution. You should focus your wrath on the Democrats that will not correct our immigration laws. The only reason there is a surge of children and families is because the democrats and their radical liberals have made it clear to the world that if you bring children you are free to illegally cross the border. You may be stopped but the kids you bring with you (your own or rent-a-kiddie) are essentially a get out of jail card. We now have Africans from the Congo crossing over with luggage, the latest group are Haitians, WTF?
  • As an immigrant I support our immigrants that come here legally but not those that break the law. Diversity is not our strength but just adds to the division and conflict within our society. Trump may be vulgar and unorganized but his efforts to maintain our sovereign borders are welcomed and will secure his second term. 6 or 7 years ago, every senior Democrat (Biden, Hillary, Schumer, Pelosi, etc.) were against open borders and illegal immigrants. Their current stance is crass politics not concern for human welfare.
  • Truth first
  • July 12, 2019 at 21:08
  • Diversity IS our strength.
  • PJ London
  • July 14, 2019 at 16:14
  • Diversity can never be strength, never.
    All through history “Unity is Strength” has been the rule. “Divide and conquer” has been the rule.
    Only a fool or charlatan would consider diversity to be a strength.
  • Rob Roy
  • July 15, 2019 at 15:38
  • Ray,
    Thank goodness for Consortium News! And, yes, let’s hear from TULSI GABBARD and spread the word that’s she’s our best bet for the next president, one who would stop the illegal brutal wars.
    Thanks, Dan, for a very informative read.
  • Jeff Harrison
  • July 15, 2019 at 16:40
  • You must not be a native English speaker. Please note, unity is neither the opposite of nor the absence of diversity. Unity means that everybody gets together, not that everybody is the same. In reality, your way of thinking produces a flawed decision making syndrome.
  • Gailstorm
  • July 13, 2019 at 01:01
  • We are talking about asylum seekers that are coming to border officials. Nothing illegal. The delay is in processing.
  • Nathan Mulcahy
  • July 13, 2019 at 10:28
  • I too, as a legal immigrant, believe that every country has the right, in fact obligation, to protect its borders from illegal immigrants.
  • The Democrats’ fault is not that they are not impeaching Trump for trying to protect our borders (although I do not agree with Trump’s methods). The Dems’ real fault is not addressing the root cause — which is our interferences, coups and destabilizing activities in the countries where the migrants are coming from. A prime example, among many others, is the coup in Honduras when her majesty Hillary was the sec of state.
  • Bob in Portland
  • July 13, 2019 at 12:41
  • I would suggest that both Republican and Democratic Parties have had opportunities to resolve much of the immigration issue and neither party did. The most recent was the first two years of Trump’s term when the Republicans had the White House and both chambers of Congress.
  • Many of the people taking the long and dangerous trek from Central America have been driven north as a result of US-backed coups and the death squads that followed. (Honduras is in the lap of SOS Clinton and President Obama)
  • Any actual resolution of the flood of immigration north to the US will require a change of US foreign policy which depends on America’s darker forces to destabilize democracy abroad. Just saying.
  • Skip Scott
  • July 14, 2019 at 07:17
  • To put a finer point of it, it is democratic socialism that America’s “darker forces” seek to destabilize. They must ensure that the maximum amount of capital flows to the 1%. The immigration (or more accurately “refugee”) crisis is just one nasty by-product of that policy. Here at home we have the heroin epidemic as one program of many to “cull the herd” of an overabundance of “lessers”, to go with the “death squad” solution we use to our south.
  • BTW, I have had difficulty posting to this article this morning, and have had numerous “error 503” results when trying to reload the page.
  • Seer
  • July 14, 2019 at 01:25
  • You can say “legal” and “illegal” all you want, but the actual determinant is, surprise, that of actual LAW!
  • https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158
  • No one is illegal unless they don’t seek asylum status or other legally accepted means of entry.
  • Anyone that is halfway awake will KNOW that the problem largely originates with US foreign policy, which has been massively destabilizing to MANY countries to the south of the US.
  • War Is A Racket — one only need look at who is profiting here to see that this is no more than war profiting in another dimension (private corps handling the arresting nets of the fleeing masses).
  • Rob Roy
  • July 15, 2019 at 15:01
  • DW Bartoo, I agree.
  • Rob Roy
  • July 15, 2019 at 15:17
  • Ray,
    Thank goodness for Consortium News! And, yes, let’s hear from TULSI GABBARD and spread the word that’s she’s our best bet for the next president, one who would stop the illegal brutal wars.
    Thanks, Dan, for a very informative read.
  • Thomas
  • July 13, 2019 at 11:30
  • Let us hopr that Ray keeps up his very excellent work. We hunger for the truth. And Ray is one of the rare truthtellers.
  1. Mike from Jersey
  2. July 12, 2019 at 10:20
  3. The whole Mueller investigation was always “theatre” and not “law.” And not just “theatre” by Mueller, but by the media and the Democratic Party as well. And the Republicans cannot rejoice in the result since — not only did Mueller baselessly refuse to concede “exoneration” — Mueller’s report itself is a joke in the first place. This article points that out.
  4. So what are we left with?
  5. Only a few things were proven: Mueller has no credibility, the “Justice Department” is dysfunctional, the mainstream media is a joke and the the DNC was able to rig the primaries and effectively hide that fact using the fog of the Russiagate farce.
  6. In short, America’s political system is completely broken.
  • Seer
  • July 14, 2019 at 01:32
  • The bottom line: Deep State has been shielded.
  • I very much doubt that the lot of them don’t know that the empire is in decline. At the point in which it is obvious to everyone else none of this is going to matter. When Dick Cheney said that the American way of life wasn’t negotiable it was because any negotiation would reveal is as being a big house of cards. The power players are playing out the last hands, and they know it.
  1. Robert Mayer
  2. July 12, 2019 at 10:17
  3. Tnx CN, Daniel… gotta love the Prigozhin publicity pic… “No mo Mr. Niceguy!!!”
    & wat dat “r” in RT stand 4? Can MS Greedia ever tell da trut?
    ?
  1. O Society
  2. July 12, 2019 at 09:20
  3. We have heard the name of Judge Dabney Freidrich before. She is a bit of a wildcard here, as she does not necessarily do what the powers that be expect of her. Here she pulls the rug out from under Mueller when he and the Scooby Doo gang was no doubt expecting never to actually have to go to court against the Russian meddling kids:
  4. https://osociety.org/2018/10/21/judge-orders-mueller-to-prove-russian-company-meddled-in-election/
  5. and here she has Kavanaugh’s back during his Supreme Court nomination process as he screams about his entitlement to do whatever he damned well pleases because he’s entitled rich folk who went to Yale part of the Club aristocracy:
  6. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4946213-Judge-Dabney-Friedrich-s-Letter-to-the-Senate.html
  1. Piotr Berman
  2. July 12, 2019 at 09:19
  3. About Prigozhin the oligarch, Wikipedia: “The Anti-Corruption Foundation accused Prigozhin of corrupt business practices. They estimated his illegal wealth to be worth more than one billion rubles.[11]” So the opposition outfit (and those exist in “dictatorial” Russia) accuses Prigozhin of amassing 16 million dollars of “illegal wealth”. Poor Russia. In USA, a single doctor can get more by overbilling Medicare, Workers’ Compensation etc.
  1. KiwiAntz
  2. July 12, 2019 at 09:16
  3. Mueller, Mueller, Mueller- Class , anyone, anyone?? Ferris Mueller’s Day Off is turning into a nightmare & his Report is crashing & burning, faster than a US Drone, shot down & blasted out of the Sky, by the IRG in the Sea of Homuz? It’s all very well accusing people of crimes & slandering reputations knowing or hoping that under normal circumstances the accused wouldn’t show up to defend the charges, but these accused Russians are prepared to challenge Mueller’s fictitious findings? What do you do now Mr Mueller, now that your bluff has been called? Another one of many nails in the coffin of this ridiculous, American, Hallucination Hoax called Russiagate!
  • Realist
  • July 12, 2019 at 16:08
  • Mueller thought he was simply practicing the real government policy on fooling the public with endless iterations of horse hockey which Dubya tried to obscure with his “fool me once, fool me twice…” razz-ma-tazz. Mr. Mueller will take the “A” train to Davy Jones’ locker trying to hoodwink the public on this fiasco, rather than getting religion and uttering the more appropriate “mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.”
  1. AnneR
  2. July 12, 2019 at 09:07
  3. Nice, Mr Lazare, very, very nice. One can only hope that Mueller and the rest of the conspirators (for what else are they?) get their full comeuppance. However, I doubt that given past history and the ability of all those with and in power to escape full scrutiny and real punishment (a lengthy prison sentence).
  4. Unfortunately and dishearteningly, I also doubt that the true believers, of which there are all too many and among whom all too many are highly and expensively educated, will let any of this alter by one iota their apparently adamantine position on “Russiagate,” their anti-Putin Russophobia. Or their equally apparent adoration of HRC.
  • Rob
  • July 12, 2019 at 12:27
  • You can bet that the likes of Rachel Maddow will never change their tune on the subject of Russiagate. However, with the election season heating up, it might seem wise for them to start singing a different tune altogether, such as Sanders and Warren are too radical to have any chance of defeating Trump. The saddest thing of all is that the Dems’ fixation on Russia and Putin is now coming back to bite them in the ass. Trump could not have asked for a better gift.
  1. Antonio Costa
  2. July 12, 2019 at 09:01
  3. These indictments (including the 12 GRU) were all press releases to fuel the “I’m doing something” and “Russia’s involved” noise. Not a lawyer but those who are commented that these Russian “indictments” were not only without evidence (which would have come out in a court had such been the intent) but they went way beyond a straightforward indictment to something approximating an OP ED for the WoPo or NYT.
  4. The intel report ordered by Obama (2 of them) had no evidence, and the last one went on and on about RT as if RT has conspired to infiltrate the minds of US voters (huge laugh given their reach and those who watch, or listen generally don’t need convincing of US government nefarious doings).
  5. I did read both reports and indictments, and as a lay person it was clear there was no substance. In the case of the intel report even Obama concluded there was nothing.
  6. Yet the 2+ year circus went on and on as a media ($$$) frenzy. No one really cared, nor do they to this day.
  7. This is what the unraveling of an empire looks like. Let’s hope there’s a truly new and better day ahead after the collapse.
  1. OlyaPola
  2. July 12, 2019 at 08:58
  3. When deflating a balloon care is required to ensure it doesn’t shoot off in all directions exposing the skill levels of would-be performers.
  1. Bob Van Noy
  2. July 12, 2019 at 08:05
  3. I watched the excellent movie “The Big Short” last night, it was my second viewing after seeing it at the theater. It was painful to watch because it’s about the abject failure and corruption of Wall Street, but beyond that, it’s about the failure of Our System and about how the People always are the essential losers.
  4. We here at Consortiumnews have basically known these facts since Robert Parry’s death, why?, because Robert was an extraordinary reporter who actually looked into the underlying dynamic of the subject he reported on. And, relying on his honesty, we were brought along on the Real story leading up to this.
  5. Now, much like the movie I mentioned, we know we were right to trust CN, but there is little joy in watching the confirmation of a failed fourth estate and failed democratic experiment. Now we are left with the anxiety of how to repair this mess…
  6. Oh well, thanks Consortiumnews.
  7. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596363/
  1. Alfred di Genis
  2. July 12, 2019 at 04:18
  3. What’s needed to convince Americans that “Russia” did not interfere in the election and did not hack the DNC is not a judge but an exorcist.
  • AnneR
  • July 12, 2019 at 09:13
  • Truly. This profound belief based on DNC, HRC confabulated and paid for evidence is in so many ways, if not totally, akin to the belief in UFOs and little green men (why is it always “men”?). Yet the same people who are “Russia and Putin did it” frenetic are those who denounce as insane nutters those who believe in the existence of UFOs and those grass colored men…
  1. Realist
  2. July 12, 2019 at 04:17
  3. Maybe Mueller should ask Putin for asylum before he concedes the truth and implicates Brennan, Clapper, Hillary and Obama as masterminds of Intelgate. I don’t think he’s getting a pardon from Trump. That Hillary was so clever in her design to fatally slur both the Donald and the “New Hitler” in Moscow with one big lie, while deftly knifing Bernie in the back as attentions were directed at the bigger fish. Not! It should be interesting to see how this plays out, if the judiciary has the fortitude to stand up to the Den of Spooks.
  • Ray McGovern
  • July 12, 2019 at 11:33
  • Realist,
  • You have that right, as usual. “If the judiciary ….” A very BIG “If.”
  • How many judges like Dabney Friedrich, I wonder, are still on the bench? We may be about to see.
  • Ray
  • Rob
  • July 12, 2019 at 12:37
  • I would be interested in knowing which President put Dabney Friedrich on the bench. Does she have any history of being a Republican partisan or operative? If so, she may be open to accusations of partisanship in her recent court finding on the Mueller Report. I think she is in the right, but I can’t help wondering.
  • Art Thomas
  • July 12, 2019 at 18:16
  • According to Wikipedia, Trump nominated her to the bench in 2017.
  • Reply
  • Chet Roman
  • July 12, 2019 at 18:21
  • She was appointed by Trump in Dec. 2017
  • Sam F
  • July 12, 2019 at 21:42
  • Thanks to those who observed that she is just one more paid political operative.
    Federal judges are corrupt without exception, as my long experience with them has proven.
    One must choose judges for political trials, or forums controlled by one’s own party.
    Except that one cannot choose forums in general, and only the rich get the results.
    Those of us without the foresight to have become gangsters have no constitutional rights.
  • Steve
  • July 13, 2019 at 08:00
  • Hold on there.
  • I thought we have been told by the MSM that there is no such thing as an ‘Obama judge’ or a ‘Bush judge’ when discussing court decisions. The president who appointed a judge should have zero impact on their jurisprudence, and should not be used a political cudgel against them. I happen to agree with that. I think Trump is dead wrong when he calls out decisions he doesn’t like as being made by ‘Obama judges’.
  • But you can’t have it both ways. You can’t scold Trump for his childish fixation on who appointed a judge, then turn around and use it against judges appointed by Trump. The left despises Trump for violating political norms and standards, then gleefully violates those same norms and standards and justifies it as ‘The Resistance’. The problem is, once those norms and standards have been trampled long enough by both sides, they cease to exist. A ‘new normal’ takes hold where nobody trusts the judiciary.
  • O Society
  • July 13, 2019 at 07:50
  • Ray ~
  • Dabney Friedrich is a Trump judge just as Bret Kavanaugh is a Trump judge. He appointed them for similar reasons, his own self interests. Namely, support of the Unitary Executive Theory, which indeed makes Trump bulletproof no matter what the evidence says, yay or nea, in the Mueller report. They are his get out of jail free cards in the DC district court and the Supreme Court.
  • http://osociety.org/2019/07/12/concord-management-and-the-end-of-russiagate
  • Cerveceros
  • July 13, 2019 at 23:33
  • I wouldn’t deny that Presidents appoint judges on idealogical grounds, but to suggest that the judge is somehow compromised in this instance, on this ruling, is unsupported by any credible evidence. Much like the Mueller report itself.
  • geeyp
  • July 14, 2019 at 03:48
  • Good clarity, Cerveceros.
  • O Society
  • July 14, 2019 at 08:41
  • I never said Trump picks Supreme Court and local DC judges based on ideological grounds. Let me be more clear:
  • Donald Trump has no ideology except for “Me.” Hitler was a sincere dedicated ideologue. Mike Pence is a sincere dedicated ideologue. Donald Trump is not. Trump is *not* pro-abortion or anti-abortion. Trump is for “Me, all Me, and nothing but the me. Trump took 5 different positions on abortion in 3 days, playing both sides of the fence, depending completely upon nothing other than Trump believes saying one thing at one particular time will get him what he wants, awhile saying something completely different at a different time will get him what he wants then.
  • Trump doesn’t pick justices based on any ideology such as abortion. Trump picks judges based on what they will do for Trump. And for Trump, he wants the Unitary Executive Theory. As in Louis XIV said, “I am the State.”
  • There are mountains made of credible evidence. Here’s some now out of the dotard’s own mouth:
  • https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/03/donald-trumps-ever-shifting-positions-on-abortion
  • Sam F
  • July 14, 2019 at 08:53
  • Judges make nice-sounding judgments when that is paid for, or benefits insiders, and they do not when it is not. So yes, some judgments are supportable, but they are still corrupt, as there is no intent to do as justice demands. A stopped clock is right twice a day, and in some cases a corrupt judiciary can be correct without being right.
  • Sam F3
  • July 14, 2019 at 09:22
  • Judges make nice-sounding judgments when that is paid for and benefits insiders, and they do not when it is not. So yes, some judgments are supportable, but they are still corrupt, as there is no intent to do as justice demands. A stopped clock is right twice a day, and in some cases a corrupt judiciary can be correct without intent to be right.
  • O Society
  • July 14, 2019 at 14:55
  • Kavanaugh and Friedrich are former lovers at Yale. Let’s not kid ourselves. They are part of The Club who rule in favor of the aristocrats and against We the People. Trump is an aristocrat and these judges use the Unitary Executive Theory Dubya used to justify invasion of Iran without Congressional approval. Kavanaugh is a Bush lackey and his job is to entitle Trump’s authoritarianism. It’s clear how this appointing judges quid pro quo game works.
Michael Weddle

Written by

Founder of Climate Change Band; former NH State Rep; Supporter of Bernie Sanders & Standing Rock!

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade