Tuesday, July 23, 2019

John Solomon's New Bombshell: Durham Revisiting Mifsud

John Solomon is reporting this evening that US Attorney John Durham--Bill Barr's handpicked head of the DoJ's Russian Hoax investigation--has reached out to Joseph Mifsud's lawyer, Stephan Roh:

An investigator told Swiss attorney Stephan Roh that Durham’s team wanted to interview Mifsud, or at the very least review a recorded deposition the professor gave in summer 2018 about his role in the drama involving Donald Trump, Russia and the 2016 election. 
The contact, confirmed by multiple sources and contemporaneous email, sent an unmistakable message: Durham, the U.S. attorney handpicked by Attorney General William Barr to determine whether the FBI committed abuses during the Russia investigation, is taking a second look at one of the noteworthy figures and the conclusions of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report.

Solomon is quick to draw the obvious conclusion: This can only mean that Mueller himself, the conduct of his investigation, and the conclusions his Team Mueller drew are all coming under scrutiny.

Here's one example Solomon gives of anomalies in the Mueller inquisition--and I think we're safe in assuming that Solomon's source pointed this out:

Mueller concluded that Mifsud was a person with extensive Russia ties who planted the story about the Clinton emails in Moscow and then lied about his dealings with Papadopoulos when interviewed by the FBI in 2017. Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Mifsud. 
But unlike others accused of misleading Mueller — including Papadopoulos, former Trump adviser Michael Flynn and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort — Mifsud was not charged with a crime.

Yeah, how does that work? Some mistatements are lies that are prosecuted and others, well ...

Instead, if you recall, after being interviewed by the FBI, Mifsud received a new identity from an intelligence service (most assume it was MI6) and disappeared--rumored to be dead, but actually hiding in plain sight in Rome.

As we learned today, Lindsey Graham is planning to call Papadopoulos before the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is therefore of more than passing interest that Solomon informs us:

Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), [has] raised recent concerns that Mueller’s portrayal of the Mifsud-Papadopoulos contacts doesn’t add up.
Roh told me the information he is preparing to share with Durham’s team from his client will accentuate those concerns.

Oh. It begins to sound as if Graham is coordinating with Barr and Durham. And Mueller may be in deep doo-doo. Hey, couldn't happen to a more deserving guy. Or, at least he's on my short list of deserving guys.

Now, here are some more tidbits that Roh and Mifsud want to share with Durham's investigators:

Mifsud was a “longtime cooperator of western intel” who was asked specifically by his contacts at Link University in Rome and the London Center of International Law Practice (LCILP) — two academic groups with ties to Western diplomacy and intelligence — to meet with Papadopoulos at a dinner in Rome in mid-March 2016 ...

In other words, the cultivation of Papadopoulos was an intel op from the very beginning--a Western intel op. Papadopoulos was a target, not someone trolling for "dirt on Hillary."

A few days after the March dinner, Roh added, Mifsud received instructions from Link superiors to “put Papadopoulos in contact with Russians,” ...

Right. Since Mifsud didn't actually know any suitable Russians, the FBI helpfully provided a female agent to play the part of a Russian for Papadopoulos. But Mueller wants us to think that Mifsud was a Russian agent. Nice try.

Solomon observes, with regard to all this:

If the FBI’s and Mueller’s portrayals are correct, Mifsud’s current story could be simply a Russian disinformation campaign or an exaggeration by a lawyer who seeks media attention and book promotion. Thus, everything Mifsud says must be given careful scrutiny. 
But a close examination of the Mueller report identifies significant gaps and omissions, and occasional inaccuracies, that pose troubling questions.

Exactly. And those troubling questions all concern Team Mueller and the earlier FBI/CIA ops.

Here's Solomon's bottom line:

There is now compelling evidence Mueller omitted or misrepresented important facts about Mifsud and Papadopoulos that could change the public’s understanding of events. And those aren’t the only omissions and factual errors to emerge. 
Mueller never disclosed in his report that Manafort business partner Konstantin Kilimnik, identified in the final report as having ties to Russian intelligence, actually was a regular informer for the State Department from 2012-2017. The report also incorrectly identifies an American citizen from the former Soviet republic of Georgia as a Russian. 
Such omissions and mistakes add to the mistrust of the final product. And as the Durham team’s overture to Roh makes clear, Mueller’s testimony before Congress may not be the final verdict for his findings.

If I were in Mueller's shoes I wouldn't take a single step without first clearing it with Bill Barr. I strongly suspect that these details are emerging because Barr wants Republicans to be assured that he and Durham have been busy--very busy--and are making good progress.

Solomon's article is long and detailed. Read it here: Robert Mueller soon may be exposed as the 'magician of omission' on Russia.


  1. I read Papadopoulos' book. He's certain Misfud was acting on behalf of some intelligence agency, to entrap Papad. Misfud seems to be a respectable guy, not invested in American partisan politics, and maybe he's been given the courage to push back on Mueller's lies. God, make it so.

    1. He probably didn't know the big picture, was just doing jobs. Then they told him he had to get a new identity and a new life. No fun in that. He wants out of that, and he'll talk to whoever can help him.

  2. The list of errors, omissions, and misrepresentations in Mueller's report gets longer by the week.

    Is there a chance that Mueller (or someone?) asks for it to be withdrawn as it is fatally compromised with such to be unreliable in any useful way...

    (One can always hope.)

    1. No. It's a fait accompli. He has to live with his work product as it is.

  3. Democrats will begin each question by grandstanding with a speech implying obstruction and then recite passages from the Mueller report that are unfavorable to Trump. Mueller will then be asked to elaborate and he will simply acknowledge what the report says. On the Republican side, there will be similar grandstanding and a recitation of the many problematic aspects of the Mueller investigation, followed by questions that Mueller will refuse to answer. The media will bluster anti-Trump rhetoric for a few days and then nothing much will happen. Without a smoking gun of some sort, the Democrats will not approve articles of impeachment because polling will show that that is a net loser for them. Then everyone is DC leaves for the August recess except for Barr and Durham's staff, who will then solely have the national spotlight if they choose to use it.

  4. I forgot to add your quote "Bill Barr gets this, and has "got it" all along." to my previous comment.

    If you are able to alter my comments, please fix it for me. Thank you.

    1. I can't even edit my own comments, much less anyone else's. Blogger is a bit frustrating, but it's free.