Thursday, March 19, 2020

Larry Johnson On The Collapse Of The Russia Hack Narrative

The other day Larry Johnson did a nice blog on the dismissal of the Concord Management case--A Cornerstone of Russia Hacked the 2016 Election Collapses. He makes the important point--discussed in comments here--that the Concord Management case was always presented by Russia Hoax apologists and the Deep State as "Real proof that the Russians helped elect Donald Trump." It was The Real Deal--and Johnson cites The Atlantic as an example:

The indictment details highly specific allegations—including names, dates, and the text of private messages—that appear to substantiate central elements of the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment [ICA] that Russia made an active, concerted effort to subvert American democracy.

We've known ever since the ICA was issued in January, 2017, that it was a key part of the Russia Hoax narrative, both in defense of Deep State crimes during the 2016 election and as justification for the Mueller Witchhunt and the ensuing Impeachment Theater. Bill Barr knows that, too, and that's why John Durham has been focused on the who-what-when of the ICA--to the consternation of the Deep State. The dismissal of the Concord Management case knocks a critical underpinning from under that narrative.

The rout of Team Mueller is now complete, but Johnson does well in reminding us that it was inevitable as long ago as April, 2019, when Judge Dabney Friedrich admonished Team Mueller for making "false allegations" about one of the defendants--the Internet Research Agency (IRA). The main false allegation was that the IRA had anything at all to do with the Russian government:

The Mueller team folded in the face of a real lawyer, hired by Concord Management. That is what the Mueller team never counted on. 
But this was not the first setback for the Mueller team in this case. They were admonished by the Judge last year for falsely and improperly allegeding [sic] that the IRA was a Russian Government tool for intelligence operations.  
The Judge's order for the Prosecutors to cease linking the alleged conspiracy in the indictment to the Russian government was vindicated with the final decision to throw the case out for good. If the Mueller prosecutors actually had real evidence that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 US Presidential contest then they would not have dropped the case permanently. If it was a matter of figuring out how to introduce intelligence information to buttress their evidence they would have left the door open for a future revival of the case. But they did just the opposite. They asked that the charges be dropped completely and permanently.

The dismissal of the case with prejudice eliminates an important narratival defense and talking point. Any attempt to explain it away will fall on deaf ears because it will simply be too complicated for most people to listen to--not to mention, false.


  1. At present, the Deep State tactic for burying DOJ's conduct in the RussiaHoax is to enable limited shaming and termination of the cases involved. The hope is that this media campaign will assuage public angry over the coup and allow a whitewash that excuses DOJ's role as incompetence.

    But the DOJ engaged in actual criminal conduct throughout the coup (and related cases, in particular Flynn) and that is not a trivial matter than can be easily swept under the rug. Without prosecutions (and tangible accountability) for the perpetrators, history guarantees a repeat in a future Dem Administration.

    Barr and Durham have one shot at fixing this problem, and it begins with serious indictments before the election. If he misses that window, then the public will know that the fix is in and the corruption cannot be remedied by DC itself.

    The real danger is that a year from now Barr will be using the full power of DOJ/FBI to attack the patriotic citizens of this country instead of the DC criminals. That is the fate that awaits us if Barr/Durham blinks.

    1. I agree that they have this one shot. That's it.

    2. No your honor, we need to keep these prosecutors because they are merely incompetent and not corrupt. That is their story and they are sticking with it.

      Rob S

  2. Well, however many or few shots there are, at least we're getting back to the hoax/coup story. I'm exhausted from discussing the WuFlu. As it is, I've probably got some real work to do! Thnaks for staying on to of this Mark.

  3. I view the dismissal with prejudice as progress.

    I am surprised at all the still slow walking of things Justice and the FBI are doing. The latest one is requiring FOIA Requests are done through snail mail, instead of electronically.

    Barr with Durham we just don't know what is going on.

  4. Russian businessman seeks criminal proceedings against Obama over unlawful prosecution

    MOSCOW, March 19. /TASS/. Russian businessman Yevgeny Prigozhin demanded that criminal proceedings be initiated against former US President Barack Obama, as well as a number of US congressmen, senators and officials because of the illegal prosecution of his Concord company and him personally.

    The businessman’s letter to US Attorney General William Barr was published by the Concord Press Service on Thursday.

    "By this letter, I demand that a criminal case be initiated against a group of individuals, including former US President Barack Obama, senior officials from the US Department of Justice, members of the US Congress and Senate, who, by entering into collision, taking illegal actions, falsifying documents and evidence managed to institute "the United States against Concord" criminal proceedings to defame Concord, me personally, and the Russian Federation," Prigozhin said in a letter.

    In another letter addressed to Barr, the businessman demands that the case against Concord, which was terminated on Wednesday, be returned to the court.

    According to him, the trial was terminated at the request of the prosecutor’s office because the prosecution fears "to present false evidence in open jury, on the basis of which a criminal case against Concord was framed and considered for more than two years."

    Prigozhin demands either to continue the trial or remove charges from his company due to lack of guilt and corpus delicti.

    Earlier the the businessman said that he was preparing a $50 billion lawsuit against the US authorities. ....


    I am cheering for Prigozhin.

  5. Barr can elevate himself to Churchillian heights if he manifests the courage to take on the Deep State directly by coming clean about the criminality that arose within DOJ/FBI during the Obama Administration, and then remedying that travesty by the application of the rule of law (e.g. indictments of the ringleader perpetrators). Does he have that in him? We'll see.

  6. Have the Feds 77bvgever asked* for charges to be dismissed with prejudice, let alone in such a famous case?

    1. I'm sure it's happened before, but it is rare--. It usually happens when it becomes clear that the defendant has been cleared or the government has engaged in egregiously bad conduct. The most recent high profile federal case I can think of is the Cliven Bundy case, and that was basically for prosecutorial misconduct. In the Concord case, of course, Team Mueller wants you to believe something different.

    2. Figures. I'd forgotten about Bundy.

      "77bvgever asked*" was supposed to be "*ever asked*".
      My cat jumped on the keyboard, just before I hit "Publish".

    3. Clinesmith will likely use "the cat jumped on my keyboard" excuse for the "creative editing" he did to the Carter Page FISA warrant support email, that resulted in it having the exact opposite meaning it had when he received it.

      He has no other defense...

    4. Question - If you locked a hundred Howler Monkeys in a room with a hundred keyboards how long would it be before they typed the complete Mueller report?

      Answer - Never, Howler Monkeys are epistemologically indisposed to that level of mendacity.
      Tom S.

    5. Yeah, EZ, every D.S. office should have at least one cat, so that all D.S. hacks can deploy that excuse!

    6. Hell; they'll just claim a stray jumped in through the window, leapt on his keyboard when he wasn't paying attention, and quickly departed, leaving no trace, causing an edit to the document which the DeepState Operative failed to noticed. "Oh, well; mistake were made..."

      And the MSM will dutifully chime in with "it hasn't been disproven that a cat did it."