The Real Muellergate Scandal 240


Robert Mueller is either a fool, or deeply corrupt. I do not think he is a fool.

I did not comment instantly on the Mueller Report as I was so shocked by it, I have been waiting to see if any other facts come to light in justification. Nothing has. I limit myself here to that area of which I have personal knowledge – the leak of DNC and Podesta emails to Wikileaks. On the wider question of the corrupt Russian 1% having business dealings with the corrupt Western 1%, all I have to say is that if you believe that is limited in the USA by party political boundaries, you are a fool.

On the DNC leak, Mueller started with the prejudice that it was “the Russians” and he deliberately and systematically excluded from evidence anything that contradicted that view.

Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.

There has never been, by any US law enforcement or security service body, a forensic examination of the DNC servers, despite the fact that the claim those servers were hacked is the very heart of the entire investigation. Instead, the security services simply accepted the “evidence” provided by the DNC’s own IT security consultants, Crowdstrike, a company which is politically aligned to the Clintons.

That is precisely the equivalent of the police receiving a phone call saying:

“Hello? My husband has just been murdered. He had a knife in his back with the initials of the Russian man who lives next door engraved on it in Cyrillic script. I have employed a private detective who will send you photos of the body and the knife. No, you don’t need to see either of them.”

There is no honest policeman in the world who would agree to that proposition, and neither would Mueller were he remotely an honest man.

Two facts compound this failure.

The first is the absolutely key word of Bill Binney, former Technical Director of the NSA, the USA’s $14 billion a year surveillance organisation. Bill Binney is an acknowledged world leader in cyber surveillance, and is infinitely more qualified than Crowdstrike. Bill states that the download rates for the “hack” given by Crowdstrike are at a speed – 41 Megabytes per second – that could not even nearly be attained remotely at the location: thus the information must have been downloaded to a local device, eg a memory stick. Binney has further evidence regarding formatting which supports this.

Mueller’s identification of “DC Leaks” and “Guccifer 2.0” as Russian security services is something Mueller attempts to carry off by simple assertion.Mueller shows DNC Leaks to have been the source of other, unclassified emails sent to Wikileaks that had been obtained under a Freedom of Information request and then Mueller simply assumes, with no proof, the same route was used again for the leaked DNC material. His identification of the Guccifer 2.0 persona with Russian agents is so flimsy as to be laughable. Nor is there any evidence of the specific transfer of the leaked DNC emails from Guccifer 2.0 to Wikileaks. Binney asserts that had this happened, the packets would have been instantly identifiable to the NSA.

Bill Binney is not a “deplorable”. He is the former Technical Director of the NSA. Mike Pompeo met him to hear his expertise on precisely this matter. Binney offered to give evidence to Mueller. Yet did Mueller call him as a witness? No. Binney’s voice is entirely unheard in the report.

Mueller’s refusal to call Binney and consider his evidence was not the action of an honest man.

The second vital piece of evidence we have is from Wikileaks Vault 7 release of CIA material, in which the CIA themselves outline their capacity to “false flag” hacks, leaving behind misdirecting clues including scraps of foreign script and language. This is precisely what Crowdstrike claim to have found in the “Russian hacking” operation.

So here we have Mueller omitting the key steps of independent forensic examination of the DNC servers and hearing Bill Binney’s evidence. Yet this was not for lack of time. While deliberately omitting to take any steps to obtain evidence that might disprove the “Russian hacking” story, Mueller had boundless time and energy to waste in wild goose chases after totally non-existent links between Wikileaks and the Trump campaign, including the fiasco of interviewing Roger Stone and Randy Credico.

It is worth remembering that none of the charges against Americans arising from the Mueller inquiry have anything to do with Russian collusion or Trump-Wikileaks collusion, which simply do not exist. The charges all relate to entirely extraneous matters dug up, under the extraordinary US system of “Justice”, to try to blackmail those charged with unrelated crimes turned up by the investigation, into fabricating evidence of Russian collusion. The official term for this process of blackmail is of course “plea-bargaining.”

Mueller has indicted 12 Russians he alleges are the GRU agents responsible for the “hack”. The majority of these turn out to be real people who, ostensibly, have jobs and lives which are nothing to do with the GRU. Mueller was taken aback when, rather than simply being in absentia, a number of them had representation in court to fight the charges. Mueller had to back down and ask for an immediate adjournment as soon as the case opened, while he fought to limit disclosure. His entire energies since on this case have been absorbed in submitting motions to limit disclosure, individual by individual, with the object of ensuring that the accused Russians can be convicted without ever seeing, or being able to reply to, the evidence against them. Which is precisely the same as his attitude to contrary evidence in his Report.

Mueller’s failure to examine the servers or take Binney’s evidence pales into insignificance compared to his attack on Julian Assange. Based on no conclusive evidence, Mueller accuses Assange of receiving the emails from Russia. Most crucially, he did not give Assange any opportunity to answer his accusations. For somebody with Mueller’s background in law enforcement, declaring somebody in effect guilty, without giving them any opportunity to tell their side of the story, is plain evidence of malice.

Inexplicably, for example, the Mueller Report quotes a media report of Assange stating he had “physical proof” the material did not come from Russia, but Mueller simply dismisses this without having made any attempt at all to ask Assange himself.

It is also particularly cowardly as Julian was and is held incommunicado with no opportunity to defend himself. Assange has repeatedly declared the material did not come from the Russian state or from any other state. He was very willing to give evidence to Mueller, which could have been done by video-link, by interview in the Embassy or by written communication. But as with Binney and as with the DNC servers, the entirely corrupt Mueller was unwilling to accept any evidence which might contradict his predetermined narrative.

Mueller’s section headed “The GRU’s Transfer of Stolen Material to Wikileaks” is a ludicrous farrago of internet contacts between Wikileaks and persons not proven to be Russian, transferring material not proven to be the DNC leaks. It too is destroyed by Binney and so pathetic that, having pretended he had proven the case of internet transfer, Mueller then gives the game away by adding “The office cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred by intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016”. He names Mr Andrew Muller-Maguhn as a possible courier. Yet again, he did not ask Mr Muller-Maguhn to give evidence. Nor did he ask me, and I might have been able to help him on a few of these points.

To run an “investigation” with a pre-determined idea as to who are the guilty parties, and then to name and condemn those parties in a report, without hearing the testimony of those you are accusing, is a method of proceeding that puts the cowardly and corrupt Mr Mueller beneath contempt.

Mueller gives no evidence whatsoever to back up his simple statement that Seth Rich was not the source of the DNC leak. He accuses Julian Assange of “dissembling” by referring to Seth Rich’s murder. It is an interesting fact that the US security services have shown precisely the same level of interest in examining Seth Rich’s computers that they have shown in examining the DNC servers. It is also interesting that this murder features in a report of historic consequences like that of Mueller, yet has had virtually no serious resource put into finding the killer.

Mueller’s condemnation of Julian Assange for allegedly exploiting the death of Seth Rich, would be infinitely more convincing if the official answer to the question “who murdered Seth Rich?” was not “who cares?”.

——————————————

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this 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 articles, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



 


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed on June 2, 2019.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

240 thoughts on “The Real Muellergate Scandal

1 2 3
  • Wikikettle

    Dear Craig, so much respect to you for the information you provide. Your contributors comments and debates are of the highest standards.
    I stopped watching TV years ago. I listen to the radio, but even then, rush to turn it off on the hour and half hour so called selective slanted half truths “News”. When a country loses its Rule of Law, the Judiciary corrupted, little people of no stature, integrity as Ministers of the Crown….we all look to the few brave to speak speak out. You are one of those Sir..The coming case for Julian will be The test of British Justice to stand firm and assert itself. Otherwise we continue down the slope of decline and fall…As Mark Antony says in his speech for Julius Caesar..”O judgement thou art fled to brutish beasts, and men hath lost their reason”..

  • uncle tungsten

    The killer of Seth Rich may well have been one of the dinner guests that Seth dined with that night. Dirty Bob Mueller has form and Rosenstein knew all of it. The silence swirling in the wake of Rosensteins departure is deafening. If ever there is an unravelling of this evil brew and it’s thugs I do hope to see it all.

    A crown of molten gold would be too kind to these barbarians.

    • Gordon G

      Simon, I noticed this too, and like you couldn’t quite believe it … but, we live in strange times. Can anyone confirm this? I cannot think it would be legal.

      • John2o2o

        More fake news doing the rounds. Even the usually reliable OffGuardian has become infected.

        My suggestion: believe nothing anyone tells you unless they can back up what they say with convincing evidence.

        As far as I’m concerned this story is hearsay. I don’t believe it.

  • Coldish

    Readers interested in additional background to this alleged hack could have a look at Steve McIntyre’s detailed investigations, for instance at climateaudit.org/2018/03/24/attribution-of-2015-6-phishing-to-apt28/

  • Hieroglyph

    Allegedly, Rich was killed by 2 M13 gang members. And both of them wound up dead, too. M13 are, or were, the heavies for the DNC. Amusingly, Trump has been methodically taking down M13, causing much consternation among their Democrat employers. Weird rumours around Adrenochrome as well, which also involves M13. Curiouser and curiouser.

    The Seth Rich murder, as Craig knows, is potentially the biggest story in America for 50 years. And winds up with well-known politicians in jail. You know who they are.

    • John A

      The stabbings that Seth Rich suffered were not considered potentially fatal by the A&E doctors on duty when he arrived. Then suddenly, they were told to withdraw and another ‘medical’ team took over. Soon enough Rich was declared dead.
      This was the witness statement of one of the original A&E doctors. He is now probably in fear of his life. (A bit like the letter to the Times by a Salisbury doctor that nobody had been poisoned)

    • WJ

      It is not helpful to conflate the question of Seth Rich’s being the DNC leaker with Seth Rich’s murder. Just because he was likely the leaker or intermediate for the leaker doesn’t mean his death was related to the leak. Establishing that he was involved in the leak, however, would to my mind warrant a reexamination of his murder case, as it would suggest there was at least one possible motive other than robbery behind his shooting. By jumping to the conclusion that you are doing, you only aid those who do not want any of this reopened.

  • Tatyana

    *I don’t know how exactly this position is called in the USA, in russian it is “прокурор” (prosecutor). So I will use ‘prosecutor’.
    Mueller is ‘Special Prosecutor’, and William Barr is ‘Prosecutor General’ (so I think Barr is the chief Prosecutor of all prosecutors).*

    From russian news:

    On May 8 Barr was accused of contempt for Congress.

    The head of the Legal Committee Gerold Nadler explained that Barr repeatedly ignored calls to Congress to testify, and refused to provide the documents requested by congressmen.

    Nadler demanded from Barr to provide a full version of Mueller’s report, without exceptions, which were made before its publication, until May 6.
    ——-
    he he he, Barr looks like a law abiding citizen somewhere near the beacon of democracy 🙂

  • OnlyHalfALooney

    Good article Craig.

    I don’t like Trump, but he’s right that the FBI is conducting a “witch hunt”.

    The FBI has opened a public corruption investigation into Republican donor and South Florida massage-parlour entrepreneur Li “Cindy” Yang, focusing on whether she illegally funnelled money from China into the president’s re-election effort or committed other potential campaign-finance violations.

    South China Morning Post: FBI opens foreign money investigation into Chinese Donald Trump donor Cindy Yang
    https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3009644/fbi-opens-foreign-money-investigation-chinese

    It’s about $5,400 ! Talk about scraping the barrel!

    Just think how much money the Clintons arranged to be paid into their “Foundation”. For example: $1 million from Qatar while Hillary was still Secretary of State! Of course, Qatar never expected anything in return. How could one ever suspect such a wicked thing!

    Reuters: Clinton’s charity confirms Qatar’s $1 million gift while she was at State Dept
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-foundation/clintons-charity-confirms-qatars-1-million-gift-while-she-was-at-state-dept-idUSKBN12Z2SL

    • Blissex

      In the USA the Supreme Court has ruled that making occasional payments or even paying montly retainers to serving politicians is entirely legal under “freedom of speech” principles, unless it can be proven that they were the consequence of promises of specific favours by the politician.
      Investigations about $5,400 donations are of course a bit of a joke, but they keep the news going (without mentioning the amount of course). They are especially a joke as D Trump has been for decades ones of the biggest donors to political campaign, him being a billionaire real estate developer needing big tax loopholes for real estate income:

      http://uk.businessinsider.com/top-50-political-donors-in-america-by-state-2018-3
      «Donald Trump, Sheldon Adelson, Linda McMahon, and David Trone are all big names in business. They’re also some of the largest political donors across the 50 United States, according to Zippia.
      [ … ] The donation data applies strictly at a national level — contributions for state and local elections or causes are not taken into account. Donald Trump, the current US president, actually came out as the top donor for New York state.
      »

      Being a NYC real estate developers means one has to pay a lot of money to politicians in two ways: officially as a donor for favourable tax laws, and unofficially as a briber to get favourable zoning and regulatory decisions. The idea that D Trump is corrupt because he has been bribed is of the “man bites dog” level of ridiculousness. For the Democrats accusing him to be a briber instead is a problem because no doubt he has bribed a lot, but in NYC and NJ most politicians he might have bribed are democrats, so they go after him instead with these ridiculous allegations.

  • TFS

    MeullerGate is nothing butt ‘Cover Your Ass Gate’.

    They didn’t expect Trump to win, and thus find out their shenanigans.

    MeullerGate is all about getting Trump to do things that could be illegal so the Dems and public opinion could force him out and taint his 2020 race on conceal their abuse (it aint gonna work)

  • Smitty

    Excellent rant Mr Murray, great points.

    BTW you can let the MI6 guys know the Trump coup is being led by Iran* agent Jamie Gorelick. Gorelick also runs the blackmail bribery ring that runs the US and EU governments.

    *https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/schlumberger-oilfield-holdings-ltd-agrees-plead-guilty-and-pay-over-2327-million-violating-us

    Gorelick was on the SLB board 2002-2010 including the 6 years of treason with Iran, Mueller, Comey and others all conspired to obstruct justice and protect their Iranian agent/paymaster from criminal prosecution. (It worked the USDOJ didnt notice her on the board)

  • TFS

    As regards Wikileaks. I think

    1. Wikileaks should send an FOI request on Britain’s potential spying on Julian Assange whilst in custody. Don’t forget to indicate Britain’s friends in low places like Israel, SpartUSA and Germany doing the dirty work to sidestep legal protections.

    2. Wikileaks should Petition the government to introduce those Swedish laws which they have tried try Julian under. In all their gusto to support women the parliamentarians and MSM forget to introduce those very same laws into this country. The either forgot or are full of BS.
    https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/05/08/people-who-publicly-fret-about-assange-rape-allegations-are-lying/

    I know 70 Mp’s who would support the idea.
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-13/70-mps-demand-assange-face-extradition-sweden-not-us

  • Stephen Ambartzakis

    Apparently Mueller was James Comey’s ex boss at the FBI, the self-same Comey fired by Trump and lamented by the MSM. Stinks, doesn’t it

  • DW

    I’m a little late to this, but I have to ask, where did you get “41 Megabytes per second” from?
    I followed your link*, and there it claims “49.1 megabytes per second” with another link as source.
    I followed that link** and found the claim “1,976 MegaBytes of data in 87 seconds” which is (after rounding) 23 Megabytes per second.
    Is everyone just plucking numbers out of thin air?

    *https://consortiumnews.com/2019/03/13/vips-muellers-forensics-free-findings/
    **https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/

  • Jack

    Muellergate is just another period of The Red scare that have been going on and off for decades back. Its hysterical and in the end just benefit those that want to make Trump more hawkish. Just let see how he threat China, Iran, Venezuela these days – with the applaude by the media. Even EU seems to have no issue with Trump on this matter. Disgusting!

    • OnlyHalfALooney

      The EU does not support the Trump administration’s approach to Iran, China or Cuba. With regard to Venezuela, I think various European governments were told by the USA that Maduro was guaranteed to be gone within a week. Now the attempted takeover of Venezuela by the CIA’s guy, Guadio, has completely failed, I suspect EU governments wish they had been more cautious.

      Spain seems to be playing a strange role in all this: at first reluctant to join other EU countries against Maduro, but now harbouring opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez in its Caracas embassy.

      • Jack

        I dont agree. EU have done everything to follow US on Iran going back decades, the latest protests (against Trump) are just noise, they claim they want to have a deal with Iran but in the end are not doing anything to uphold it, same goes for Cuba and China is the same approach on Huawei, trade/tariffs and so on. Sure its not as extreme as Trump but there is no real difference.
        Just take this
        Macron try to do what Trump does:
        “France challenges Beijing in South China Sea”
        https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/france-challenges-beijing-in-south-china-sea

        On Venezuela, Spain did recognize Guiado early on. If US wouldnt have recongized Guiado, the EU sure wouldnt have done it. They are lackeys fair and square.

  • Phill

    It’s also worth pointing out that the founder of Crowdstrike – Dmitri Alperovitch – is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

  • Ewan

    It sounds bizarre, but it is rumoured (see Off-Guardian) that UK and US intelligence have been interrogating Mr. Assange and that their techniques (in particular, psychotropic drugs) have triggered a psychotic episode! Is there anything in any of this?

    • John Goss

      Ewan, take no notice at Martinned’s attempt to make light of something, which if true, is a very serious indictment against our government and its secret services. Read Simon’s comment above.

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/05/the-real-muellergate-scandal/comment-page-2/#comment-865006

      Only Julian Assange can answer this – if he knows. If you doubt what the secret services can do outside the law read Annie Machon’s book “Spies, lies & whistleblowers”.

      • Ewan

        I don’t doubt the intelligence services can do all sorts of stuff. This just seems too cack-handed to be plausible. Surely they couldn’t be that stupid. Surely more likely some overzealous activist or sympathiser who knows for a fact…

      • John2o2o

        And John, take no notice of this fake news story that is doing the rounds! Julian’s closest supporters do not believe it and it stinks. falling for this nonsense helps Julian’s enemies.

        Believe it when you are presented with credible evidence. And use your head. Seriously.

    • Ken Kenn

      Should the UK and the Us be ‘ interrogating ‘ Assange?

      His 50 week stretch is only for skipping bail isn’t it?

      Unless he’s not paid his TV Licence?

      Nice to see the Labour Party snub Brillohead yesterday.

      Made great television.

      Can’t wait for May the 23rd.

      Apparently only two parties have any policies and the others will only state their policies
      in a General Election – maybe 2022?

      I’ve put a note in my diary.

    • John2o2o

      NO

      If you support Julian then you will not believe fake stories about him. It helps Jullian’e enemies.

      Do not believe those who cannot back up what they say with genuine evidence. And use your common sense!

  • Paul Damascene

    Other links on this topic.
    It would be a service — similar to the one Rob Slane produced in relation to the Salisbury drama — to pull these, along with those offered by Craig and the comment section, together into a rolling compendium.

    Automatic Earth
    https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2019/05/mueller-never-wanted-the-truth/

    Zero Hedge
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-06/major-mueller-report-omissions-suggest-hes-incompetent-or-covering-major-crimes

    Larry Johnson
    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/05/the-mueller-report-cites-three-questionable-events-as-the-foundation-for-the-special-counsel-investigation-june-2016-the.html

    • nwwoods

      The Amerithrax investigation was on his watch, one in which they fingered the wrong scientist and ruined his life before they paid him compensation of nearly 7 million $$ after he was exonerated, then they pursued another scientist who eventually killed himself. Mueller’s crew then proceeded to try the latter posthumously in the press by way of a series of selective leaks to the usual state media organs, excluding any and all exculpatory evidence of course.

  • dale L ruff

    This theory has been refuted: “Forensicator’s claim that 20 to 25 megabyte per second downloads would be impossible over the internet also raised eyebrows.

    John Bambenek, threat systems manager at the security firm Fidelis, noted that while home internet, where uploads are much slower than downloads, would not allow that speed, corporate and cloud networks could do so.

    The DNC would not provide details about its upload speeds in July of 2016.

    Proponents of the Forensicator theory have accused CrowdStrike co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch of being biased against Russia, negating his firm’s analysis.

    But CrowdStrke was not the only firm to conclude Russia was behind the attack.

    Other companies independently discovered evidence that linked the attacks to the same culprit. SecureWorks found an improperly secured URL shortening account used by Fancy Bear while investigating other attacks by the group. That account contained evidence of nearly 4,000 phishing attacks Fancy Bear waged against Gmail addresses — the attack that ensnared Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s email account among them.

    In the end, Fidelis, FireEye, SecureWorks, Threat Connect and other CrowdStrike competitors all confirmed Crowdstike’s results.”
    https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/346468-why-the-latest-theory-about-the-dnc-not-being-a-hack-is-probably-wrong

    • joel

      All the evidence suggests it was a DNC staffer who hacked the account. But whoever did performed a valuable public service, revealing to a hoodwinked public who Hillary Clinton was really beholden to and working on behalf of; a reality starkly at odds with her public speeches. No tears should ever have been spilled on behalf of an individual who is corrupt to the bone and it is difficult to credit that some continue to regret she failed to achieve her ambitions, despite knowing the truth about her.

    • Maxwell Quest

      “If the Russian hack did happen, then it was the Russians working to save American democracy from itself. So, where’s the gratitude? Where’s the love? Oh, and why are the DNC perps not in jail?” — Dmitri Orlov (July 24, 2018)

    • nwwoods

      The question remains is can the speeds described be attained from behind a VPN or using Tor or whatever means of masking the spook used to conceal his identity/location. What is certain is that he or she manipulated the documents to make them look Russian-sourced, and made a pretty sloppy job of it.

    • Northern

      Funny how the establishment defenders on here have been reduced to just denying the evidence without engaging with it. Someone should remind them that in absence of a proper argument, they would be better to just keep quiet. Attacking someone’s hypothesis whilst providing nothing to refute it does far more damage to your narrative, than it does to convince those of us who aren’t persuaded.

      I’ve never understood how serious commentators were taken in by the Mueller investigation – is the cognitive dissonance too strong to even think about it? His role in the Gulf war should have been enough to discount him from ever being seen as a person of integrity again.

    • Ingwe

      Martinned, shouldn’t you be doing something useful like filling in your time sheets or something, rather than wasting bandwith with your pathetic comments?

    • John2o2o

      “Gee”? Lol, are you an American Martinned?

      I’d say the CIA are getting sloppy – but may flatter you … and them!

  • John Murphy

    “It is worth remembering that none of the charges against Americans arising from the Mueller inquiry have anything to do with Russian collusion or Trump-Wikileaks collusion, which simply do not exist”

    I’m exploring you as a source for the first time and while you have impeccable credentials, I wonder about your credibility on this subject based on this comment. There was absolutely massive amounts of “collusion” between Trump’s campaign and various Russian contacts and a few of those contacts, of course, is what set this whole investigation in motion. Meeting with foreigners is not a crime but conspiring to steal an election is. The problem is that Mueller applied the highest level of proof – proof beyond a reasonable doubt – to consider an indictment. We know that the Russians interfered in the election, we know that the Trump campaign both welcomed that interference and even sought it, but Mueller didn’t find the “smoking gun” that proved the two sides had co-ordinated (conspired) to steal the election.

    We also know that Trump and his minions obstructed the investigation. Mueller points out in his report that he couldn’t reach the high standard of proof he required to prove a criminal conspiracy because the Trump campaign “materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.” Mueller’s investigation was sabotaged by Trump and his cronies.

    They. obstructed. the. investigation. of. collusion.

    Witnesses deleted emails and used applications with encryption or deletion functions, which also thwarted fact-finding. And Mueller didn’t aggressively pursue interviews with both Trump and Don Jr. who both refused to cooperate.

    There were over 200 contacts between Trump’s cronies and the Russians about which there was a consistent pattern of lies, coverups, or destoyed evidence. There was PLENTY of collusion, the problem was Mueller demanded the highest level of proof: proof of a criminal conspiracy beyond a “reasonable doubt”, a standard that would be necessary in a criminal trail.

    But proof beyond a reasonable doubt ISN’T required for impeachment which requires only a “preponderance of evidence”. He could have referred the collusion issue to Congress just like he did the obstruction issue, submitted his evidence to Congress to support that, and let them decide. But he didn’t, Trump basically got a pass because Mueller couldn’t prove a criminal conspiracy . . . because he was obstructed. Part II on obstruction explains why Part I on collusion couldn’t be proven. Mueller failed to find the evidence that would meet his high standard of proof because his investigation was obstructed.

    That’s what happened to the charges you note are missing from Mueller’s report. By no means does this mean that there wasn’t a conspiracy, it means that there was plenty of collusion but the highest standard of proof was missing . . . and that could have been at least partly due to obstruction.

    • Jack

      “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt”, is the normal principle in all judicial cases. You want to make it to sound as a special term Mueller have used to justify why there was no Collusion case.
      Fact is Mueller didnt find such evidence.

    • John Goss

      Sorry John, you bought the mass media brainwashing. Watch Russia Today and get some balance in your life. You might even see Craig Murray on the Alex Salmond show.

      • michael norton

        What I’d like to know John, why had not a single member of parliament ever asked where is Yulia, are they not interested or do the whips hold terrible secrets on all of them.

        How can a young Russian women be erased from life in our country
        and seemingly nobody cares?

      • John Murphy

        Sorry, John, what part of obstruction by Trump sabotaged Mueller’s ability to prove conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt? Take all the time you need.

      • John Murphy

        Sorry, John, what part of obstruction sabotaged proving conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt?

        Take all the time you need.

          • Jack

            lol john murphy is getting bizarre,
            first they wanted a mueller investigation, then when the investigation is done, and proved that there was no evidence for collusion, the same people say, ..”well you know it was collusion BUT there wasnt enough evidence”.
            Mad people..

        • ID

          John, you can hate President Trump as much as you like. But you can’t be this blind to a stitch-up can you?? The biggest conspiracy theory in modern history is the “Trump Russia collusion” theory. Just because the MSM propagated it doesn’t make it any more believable.

          Trump is the USA personified. Brash, arrogant, rude, a bit of a bully, driven by fame and money…..yet somehow he’s supposed to be a Russian stooge! hahahaha.

    • Brian c

      Forget the nudge-nudge, wink-wink innuendo of the Mueller report and check Trump’s actual policies toward Russia over the past two years.

      * harshest sanctions imposed on Russia by any administration since the cold war.
      * ramping up of war games and missle implacements on Russia’s border.
      * huge increase in military aid to ferociously anti-Russian neo-Nazis in Ukraine.
      * bombing of Russia’s Syrian ally.
      * attempted regime change of Russia’s Venezuelan ally.
      * unilateral tearing up of the INF treaty agreed by Reagan and Gorbachev.

      Where is the real world evidence for this cherished theory that Trump is taking orders from Putin?

      • Jack

        Brian C

        Good post, really show how stupid and dangerous these people are – apparenly only a war against Russia (nuclear?) will prove to these people that Trump is not a Russian puppet.

      • Tony

        Which all goes to show that Russiagate was nothing more than a rod to beat Trump into line with Establishment policy toward Russia. Which he has done with a vengeance.

    • Tony

      John Murphy, did you actually bother to read and digest the OP by Craig? Because it appears that you didn’t. Mueller simply didn’t try to attain the highest levels of proof, as shown by his disingenuity wrt to the leaked DNC emails, and his analysis of the bogus dossier and it’s surrounding shenanigans. The fact that, with a clear remit to “get Trump”, the only thing he could pin on him was unprovable possible collusion tells any genuinely independent observer everything they need to know.

      • John Murphy

        Uh, Tony, Mueller’s alleged failures around the Wikileaks source are just a small part of the Russia puzzle. Did YOU not read MY post? Please try to keep up.

        And, BTW, the Steele dossier was NOT “bogus”, the main thrust of it – Russian’s attempt to influence the election, Putin’s involvement, ongoing contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians – ALL have been proven true. You’ve apparently drunk the kool-aid or just never had the critical thinking skills needed to keep up with this kind of story.

        Sorry, Tony, come back when you’ve done your homework.

        • pretzelattack

          lol now you’re defending the steele dossier. are you still on the “saddam had wmd’s” train, too?

        • ID

          John,

          Everyone messes in everyone else’s affairs / elections. The US is especially good at it. It’s been going on since the dawn of time. It’s just the usual spy vs spy stuff. You can’t suddenly point to some of that as proof that Russia colluded with Trump to influence the election. The same level of Russia meddling (and it was pretty minor) likely went on in every modern US election and none of it had any real impact.

          The Steele dossier is total garbage. Trying to suggest there is some merit to it by pointing to some utterly unremarkable foreign state election meddling is an extremely weak argument.

    • Courtenay Barnett

      John Murphy,

      Two points of inquiry here:-
      1. Was there not a) the collusion and ii) the obstruction aspects of Mueller’s investigation.
      2. On the first limb of the investigation, surely, if Mueller really was searching for the collusion – would he not have investigated the most helpful and/or credible and/or knowledgeable persons/sources he had access to; and if so then – explain and/or contradict – if you will. Why wouldn’t Mueller have gone to the two very good sources he had at all material times available to him – Julian Assange ( outside the establishment); Bill Binney (inside the establishment) – and interviewed and investigated therefrom to the fullest extent?

      • John Murphy

        I don’t know what happened with Mueller’s investigation of the Wikileaks part of the puzzle. That remains to be seen. I don’t see this necessarily as the most important part of the puzzle anyway.

        But even if he failed miserably on this score, he DID turn up a lot of good, solid information that shows the vast networks of connection between the Trump campaign and the Russians, the depth of dishonesty when his cronies were asked about these connections, and the degree of obstruction that was mounted to sabotage this investigation.

        And that doesn’t even begin to examine the current disinformation campaign to mislead the public about what Mueller DID find. Look no further than many of the post on this thread to see how effective that has been.

        • zoot

          john murphy, how do trump’s punitive and antagonistic policies toward russia fit the conspiracy theory? cause i see the one post you did not respond to is brian’s.

        • HoBoJo

          From Mueller: “The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

          The ‘vast networks’ are Page, Papadopoulus (set up by Misfud), Sater (FBI informant talking to Cohen), Manafort (talking to his long term business partner) and Agalarov (Azerbaijani set up of Trump Tower meeting). So not vast at all. And a number of those look like set ups with a surprising number of people with FBI or CIA connections feeding and fishing for information.

          Meanwhile during Obama’s 2008 election his foreign policy advisor travelled to Moscow for private meetings with the Russian government prior to the election (McFaul, later Russian Ambassador). Evidence is coming in of money from Malaysia in 2012. And the Clinton campaign team travelled to China to meet with Chinese government officials, and took assistance from Ukraine. But hey, that’s just normal politics…

          And that Steele dossier, which even Steele says is at best 50% true and probably much less, was something he and FusionGPS took around a lot of US government officials and media to deliberately spread a smear – from State Dept, DoJ, FBI directly, via McCain, and through friends of Comey and into friendly journalists (Mother Jones, Buzzfeed, NYT, WaPo). That’s a lot of groundwork to place a dossier that is at most half true. But it seems to have worked on some people, because you’ve bought the dupe despite the evidence and outcome of an investigation saying otherwise.

        • Courtenay Barnett

          John,

          When you say:-
          “I don’t know what happened with Mueller’s investigation of the Wikileaks part of the puzzle. That remains to be seen. I don’t see this necessarily as the most important part of the puzzle anyway.”
          With respect, the real points I believe are that:-
          A. The question of Wikileaks and allegedly are inextricably linked issue of – did Russia interfere in the US elections? That Is what this whole ‘Russiagate’ Mueller investigation starts and actually is about – surely?
          B. So – the questioning and investigation by Muller logically must relate to an investigation of the sources most helpful and useful to provide credible leads to draw a correct conclusion as to whether or not Russia did meddle by hacking the DNC computer(s) and then did provide the information to Wikileaks.
          C. The two best sources to provide the requisite investigative information were Bill Binney and Julian Assange as persons who Mueller ‘studiously’ avoided interviewing.
          So, I simply cannot agree with you by way of your observation:-
          “But even if he failed miserably on this score”
          Thus, in terms of turning up “a lot of good, solid information” – this could not be in terms of the core issue of Russia – for that he simply never focused in the direction which would have inevitably “a lot of good, solid information”. Assange had said that Russia was not the source – so it was imperative that Mueller inquire fully as to what was the proof that Assange said he was able to establish – be that technical ( which the US NSA technical insider Bill Binney could corroborate – or – refute) – and also Mueller had access to available information from Assange which would unavaiodably have related the timing of the death of the young man ( the leaker with access to the computer(s)) – Seth Rich. Now, that Rich is dead – what if Assange states – it was Rich who gave Wikileaks the information? What then – can’t be the employee of the DNC with access to the computers and the external Russian hack at the same time – can it?
          And when you say:-
          “ And that doesn’t even begin to examine the current disinformation campaign to mislead the public about what Mueller DID find”
          That takes us nowhere for the real disinformation campaign is one of deflecting the public from A,
          B & C above.
          As you say – and logically – I draw the conclusion “Look no further…”.

  • Souzana Raphael

    Amazing article. Thank you for all of your videos and articles about Assange, Wikileaks, Manning. I will contribute to your blog in the morning , when more awake. I wonder if you can suggest what people can really DO to keep Assange from being extradited. For the past month I’ve shared many articles and videos on facebook, written my own posts summarizing the whole horrific situation in the hope of educating others,
    sent one very condemning email (letter to editor) to The Guardian, and written to Julian several times. But what can we DO to stop them from destroying him? Can’t the UK be sued for its collusion in Ecuador’s violation of international asylum law, for its refusal to comply with the demand of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (given its being a signatory to the treaty that engendered it), for putting Assange in a maximum security prison and in solitary confinement for a breach of bail? For giving him almost the maximum sentence of a year while ignoring the very serious mitigating circumstance that he jumped bail to save his life? And then there’s the UN definition of solitary confinement for more than 15 days (which should be more than one day, in my opinion!) as torture. I’ve been waiting to hear what the UN rapporteur will say after visiting Assange yesterday and consulting with others today. Any details as to real action that can be taken would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

  • Norbert Berentz

    … USA : “Russia Collusion” Inquiry …

    He, the Attorney General, should ask, why Sergey SKRIPAL is still in British “protective custody” and let testify him to Christopher Steele’s “TRUMP-Dossier”.
    SKRIPAL (still Russian patriot !) knew too much about and had to disappear (MI6-job, garnished with “Novichok”) … !!

  • Norbert Berentz

    … memory (my post from April 2018) …

    Poison ‘attacks’ in Syria and England: All just because of TRUMP …?

    It looks as if both stagings – the chemical weapon ‘attacks’ in Syria and the poison ‘attack’ on SKRIPAL in Salisbury, England – had only one target: Donald TRUMP, President of the USA.

    In Syria, simply to provoke Trump to a massive military strike against Assad and the Russians; in Salisbury, England, to withdraw a confidant about the ominous “Trump dossier” from the market (and for the act blaming the Russians!).

    This “Trump Dossier” in the US domestic policy is the basis for an unprecedented ‘witch-hunt’ on a president, who is allegedly being implicated in secret ties with Russia, just to keep him as president on a tight anti-Russia course and to continue the imperial politics of US supremacy in the world – all contrary to his actual political intentions !

    Unless Trump succeeds very soon in bringing his administration and the so-called “deep state” (along with ‘friendly’ secret services) under control, it can not be ruled out, that he will be another US president who dies during his term in office …

    • Dave

      The paradox of Trump is his international belligerence is actually a retreat from Empire and delivers America First in the true sense of the term. The problem is due to the hostility of the Globalists Left, who hate him as being “too White”, he has to embrace the Globalist Right (Zionists) for some counter balance, but who hate him for the same reason.

  • Kathryn May

    Dear Craig, I believe Kim Dotcom is another person who has information about the leaks of the DNC which he offered Meuller. Kim was willing to go from New Zealand to the US to deliver it, but his letter to Meuller was never responded to.

    • OnlyHalfALooney

      Kim Dotcom:

      I know that Seth Rich was involved in the DNC leak.

      I know this because in late 2014 a person contacted me about helping me to start a branch of the Internet Party in the United States. He called himself Panda. I now know that Panda was Seth Rich.

      Panda advised me that he was working on voter analytics tools and other technologies that the Internet Party may find helpful.

      I communicated with Panda on a number of topics including corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.

      I was referring to what I knew when I did an interview with Bloomberg in New Zealand in May 2015. In that interview I hinted that Julian Assange and Wikileaks would release information about Hillary Clinton in the upcoming election.

      The Rich family has reached out to me to ask that I be sensitive to their loss in my public comments. That request is entirely reasonable.

      I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

      If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment.

      Of course Mueller didn’t want to interview (or even take a statement from) Kim Dotcom, Assange, or Craig. It all doesn’t fit with the “Putin dunnit” narrative. Mueller was never interested in finding out the truth. He went on a fishing expedition to try and discredit Trump. Evidence that the “Hillary was a victim of Putin’s meddling” story was a complete lie is the last thing Mueller wanted to find.

      Note the date of Bloomberg interview, May 14 2015. This is before Trump even entered the race. This rather deflates the “Putin conspired with Trump” fantasy.

      The interview can be watched here: https://archive.org/details/BLOOMBERG_20150515_003000_Bloomberg_West/start/360/end/420

      • John2o2o

        I’m rather surprised at Kim. I’m not sure under what circumstances he would think that he could get “safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back” given that he is wanted in the US. That’s a very big “if”. I like Kim, but that is bizarre.

        • OnlyHalfALooney

          I know, but it would be possible for the FBI to interview Kim in New Zealand (or by video link – this is the internet age after all). It is probably also possible for Kim to make a legal deposition at the US embassy in NZ.

          I am not sure “safe passage” is legally possible unless the US withdrew all charges. I think he was just saying he is willing to testify.

          In the end, the point is that Mueller didn’t want to hear anything that contradicted his narrative.

          As Assange has pointed out, there is also the possibility that hackers did indeed hack the DNC. Possibly half the world did, in view of their lack of security. The two possibilities do not exclude each other: an inside source for the material published by WikiLeaks AND the DNC being hacked by parties unknown.

          I can’t help thinking some of this venom against Putin is “revenge” for Putin, Chirac and Schroeder working together to resist the US and UK’s plans before the illegal invasion of Iraq.

  • Sharp Ears

    Have the West’s friends, the Saudi headchoppers, stopped bombing Yemen, using UK weaponry and aircraft, now that aid and food supplies are going out to the people? Probably a silly question.

  • Wikifolk

    So how did Craig Murray manage to get into the U.S. To obtain Clinton’s emails?…..
    Wikifolk! The Dedman.files.

  • Ellis Baxter

    It would be good to have a working group to look at the ‘Ongoing Dossier’ in the works. Fusion GPS and Steele have been retained I am told by Daniel J. Jones to continue the ‘memos’ to expand the Dossier there are two the pages 34-35 that were released after the election by over. a month and the new memo about Romney and Putin! These will continue. They must be exposed! The Government lied about the NSA. They lied about health care. They lie about the fraud in the elections 7 to 15 million illegal votes cast in 2018, Mueller lied de-facto in the report. All of the Dossier was a ruse. A preemptive defense of the damage the truth would cause if the emails were in the public view. And now the lies continue again in defense of the corruption of the Neo-Fascist Left. I am a classic Liberal and a Economic Nationalist.

  • Dawn Garmon

    And yet mainstream media still present, or should I say try to present, him as a paragon of integrity.
    To his credit, however, he’s never lost his integrity because how on earth could you lose something you
    did not have in the first place!

1 2 3