portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

government | media criticism

The "Russian Interference" Scandal, In a Nutshell

July 21st, 2018

A few dozen GRU officers spent several thousand dollars to acquire fake U.S. identities and post fake news on U.S. social media, before and after the 2016 election. They hacked into some state and local electoral boards and for some reason (maybe just to see if they could do it) stole information on half a million voters in Illinois and Arizona. (Just like the NSA probably has information on lots of Russian voters.)

The impact of these posts has been exaggerated. They certainly did not shape the election. Those suggesting otherwise are either ignorant or driven by butt-headed Russophobia, or both.

The Russian officers hacked the DNC and (allegedly) gave the files to Wikileaks, which released them, revealing that FACT that the monstrously corrupt Debbie Wasserman Schultz's DNC had rigged the (fake) Democratic primary for Hillary against Bernie.

The latter is really the big sin. How DARE the leaker leak the fact that the U.S. system is so undemocratic. How dare anybody look at the empire's electoral process and say the emperor has no clothes.

Bernie Sanders was much more popular than Hillary Clinton throughout the Democratic primaries. Multiple polls showed him much better poised to defeat the republican candidate than Hillary. But Debbie told her staffers, "Don't be silly, Bernie's not going to win." She made sure her candidate won. But as the Democrats arrived at their nominating convention in July 2016 Wikileaks published her scandalous emails and she and the whole DNC leadership were obliged to resign in shame.
Wasserman Schultz's successor, CNN commentator and overt Hillary shill Donna Brazile has apologized to Sanders for her own inappropriate aid to Clinton (passing along debate questions to her during the campaign) and for the DNC's inappropriate handling of campaign funds to advantage Clinton.

In its fixation on the question of "Russian interference" the media ignores the content of that interference—which was, more significantly than the production of disinformation, the revelation of inconvenient truth. The Democratic Party thwarted the highly promising candidacy of Bernie Sanders, bitterly disappointing (and one would hope, appropriately disillusioning) a generation.

The U.S. electoral system is not sacrosanct. It's a particularly corrupt form of what Marxists call "bourgeois democracy," meaning that it allows the voter a choice of at least two Wall Street-backed candidates for an office. The voter is supposed to appreciate this "right" to vote for one or the other offered. In 2016 this meant the precious right to vote for (1) a buffoon nominated as Republican candidate due to the corporate media's relentless promotion of him through free air time (in Nov. 2015 The Nation reported that Trump was getting 23 times as much free media coverage as Sanders), or (2) a cold, warmongering establishment Democrat whose stolen coronation had been foreordained.

And the Russkies wanted to interfere in this pure democratic process! They wanted to actually EXPOSE the fact that the Americans themselves had rigged their own election! And what tool did the Russians most effectively use? Why (it is alleged), the exposure of the truth, in the form of undoubtedly authentic documents, historical primary sources documenting the corruption of U.S. "democracy."

How DARE the Russians facilitate the U.S. electorate's awareness of DNC antics! That's private, in-house stuff, U.S. dirty laundry. Not Moscow's business! For Moscow to reveal this stuff was total INTERFERENCE! Unforgivable!

And when Rand Paul blandly tells Jake Tapper on CNN that the U.S. has interfered in foreign elections many many times more than Russia in the last 70 years, Tapper bristles in patriotic indignation that Paul would posit "moral equivalency" between his holy country and any other, when it comes to such interference.

A country "exceptional" by definition, depicted as such to its subjects in their education process and ongoing political indoctrination, cannot be the moral equivalent of any other. The U.S. is GOOD, Russia is BAD, this ought to be OBVIOUS and since Trump is obviously a Putin puppet, he too is bad and ought to be impeached.

The alleged GRU intervention had minimal impact on the vote count in November 2016. Its main impact was—if the NSA'a attribution is correct—to facilitate voters' (and non-voters') awareness that the system does not, in fact, work. It does allow people like Bernie Sanders to become president.

Case closed. Not the case of Russia, but the case of the U.S. electoral system. That Russian hackers may (repeat may) have played a role in the exposure of reality, they helped make the case that the system is rotten. If that was "interference" it was surely a good thing.

A Zen priest will tell you: "See things as they really are." Wake up. The reality is the system sucks, and now the system, moribund and in self-defense, lashes out at Russia leaving Trump in an awkward position.

Everybody knows most Russians preferred Trump to Hillary, for good reasons; Hillary had pushed NATO expansion, sought regime change in Russian ally Syria and armed terrorists to topple Assad, led in the destruction of Libya, sought to influence the 2011 Russian elections, compared Putin to Hitler and the annexation of Crimea to Hitler's annexation of the Sudentenland in 1938, and pushed for regime change in Ukraine.

The U.S. media found a "Gotcha!" moment when Putin in Helsinki told reporters that he had hoped for a Trump victory. Now finally we know—yes, he liked Donald more than Hillary!

Well, duh. CNN obviously preferred Hillary. Is it abnormal to express a preference? Did "the Russians" interfere by having an apparent overwhelming preference, for some reason, for the guy saying he wanted good and normal relations with Russia to the known-quality woman who is an obvious, conscious, calculating adversary?

RT (as "all the U.S. intelligence agencies" famously agree, since this is a fixed talking point of cable anchors) favored Trump. So did Fox News. So? Did the U.S. news media treat the last French election, in which Emmanuel Macron ran against Marine Le Pen, even-handedly? How does RT reportage, accessed by very few people in this country, constitute "interference" in this country's affairs?

The real election interference scandal is the scandal of corporate interference. So long as public knowledge and opinion is shaped by media constrained by advertisers' preferences (to avoid certain topics and forms of criticism, and embrace others skewing reportage to serve the system's interests), there can be no real "democracy," no real rule of the people, here or in Russia or anywhere.

homepage: homepage: http://dissidentvoice.org/2018/07/the-russian-interference-scandal-in-a-nutshell/
address: address: Dissident Voice


latest/more details (DOJ FISA release), go to rAT's Pee Pee thread — > 22.Jul.2018 03:05

see here


the evolution of the russian apologist narrative, in a nutshell 22.Jul.2018 10:01

Clyde

It goes something like this:

"This Russian thing is nonsense. There is no evidence!"

"Ok, so the Trump campaign had contacts with several questionable Russians, but they had nothing to do with the campaign. And the DNC hack could have been anyone."

"OK, the DNC hack was done by Russian intelligence, but there is no proof that it was in any way done to impact the election."

"Ok, so they released info to sway public opinion in favor of Trump, but it's ok because we do stuff like that too! The fact that Manafort is probably going to prison is just a coincidence anyway"


The talking points get more pathetic and desperate as time goes on and as the indictments keep coming. I don't think there is a pee tape, but I hope there is just to see how these far the Kremlin apologists will bend over. I'm sure Counterpunch will write a piece telling us how most world leaders have pee tapes and it isn't a big deal.

This "Russian Interference" "Conspiracy Theory" Is 100% CIA/media Bullshit 22.Jul.2018 12:08

blues

Russia is a free speech country. Russians have the right to say anything they want about USSA elections.

They promised us all that electronic voting was so much cooler than hand counted paper ballots.

If we simply threw the "voting machines" and electronic tabulators into the landfill THIS WOULD ALL SUDDENLY GO AWAY!

Scapegoating or Russophobia is Hitlerian! 22.Jul.2018 12:30

marc marc1seed@yahoo.com

Russia sells energy to Germany to survive. Russians can live ten years longer and are free from the privatizing kleptocratic Yeltzin. The Ukraine coup was a US or CIA project in 2014 like the Honduras coup in 2009. NATO expanded from 16 to 28 despite James Baker's promise to Gorbachev that there would be no eastern expansion! The empire has a short or selective memory as Trump has only a 4th-grade reading ability (he likes one-page reports with maps)!
A future of generalized security and respect for international law needs radical change and critical and independent journalism!

Paul Craig Roberts wrote "Putin Confronts the American Dystopia" on July 17, 2018:
 https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/?p=66364

http://www.grin.com
www.freembtranslations.net

"Russia is a free speech country." 22.Jul.2018 12:44

Clyde

Totally. As long as you don't happen to be a journalist critical of Putin. Then you'll end up dead. So much freedom!

Putin The Reporter Killer? How Insane! 22.Jul.2018 13:56

blues

Why would Putin bother to murder journalists? Especially since there is a slight possibility that "word would get out" about it? In America and Europe we simply FIRE them -- and then perhaps murder them. That is so much easier! Here is one journalist who confessed to acting as a CIA stenographer. He died shortly after making this video:

Reporter Spills the Beans and Admits All the News is Fake!
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzySk8qfvxk

"Why would Putin bother to murder journalists?" 22.Jul.2018 14:27

Clyde

I don't know. Here's a crazy idea, maybe to suppress negative news about corruption in the Russian government? Maybe to send a warning to future journalists who might do the same?

but you're probably right. All of the mysteriously dead journalists in Russia who just happened to be Putin critics are probably just a wacky false flag, or just evil imperialist CIA propaganda.

great video blues 22.Jul.2018 14:29

Clyde

Showing a segment literally taken from Russian state media on why other media can't be trusted. Well I'm convinced.

I Guess You Trust The Elite Mafia Media 22.Jul.2018 14:51

blues

"on why other media can't be trusted"

Well do you actually trust the Elite Mafia Media after 9/11 and Libya, etc? YES? NO?

Do you???

(see rAT's Pee Pee thread, linked ^^above) What No One Here Has Acknowledged: 22.Jul.2018 15:41

_

all of the "Russia Russia" plot is based upon Hillary Clinton having achieved victory on 8 November 2016.


Special Counsel, FISA application, "dossier" —

*everything* was predicated upon "Her" having won the election. Everything points to utter destruction of the Trump et al. 'cabal'.


Problem :

Hillary lost.

post-FISA application [albeit redacted] release, Here is What We Know — 22.Jul.2018 15:47

_

- FBI relied on Steele/Fusion GPS to obtain the FISA warrant (we know <---this)

- FBI downplayed the fact that Candidate #2 (i.e. Clinton) paid for Fusion/Steele because Steele is totally, like 'honest' dude! (we also knew this from "the memo")

- FBI more or less downplayed Carter Page's aid in convicting Russian spies

- U.S. corporate mass media worked with the FBI to create the story from "another source" [see here  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2018/07/436449.shtml#453304 ] and this was used by the FBI to obtain the FISA warrant

- The FISC seems all too trusting of top leadership of the FBI/DOJ; and it seems far too easy to crawl up someone's ass with a Title I FISA warrant

- Four different FISC judges signed off; the first judge to sign off, Rosemary Collyer, also wrote the ruling on the FISA abuse of the FBI months later (April 2017)

- Any time Page contacted the FBI/DOJ to ask WhatTheF*** was going on with news reports about him,the FBI used this as evidence in the application that he was part of muh-Russia

- It is way too easy to obtain a FISA warrant; and the expectation appeared to be that these organizations (FBI/DOJ) would never lie or fabricate something

- This is not the first time they've gotten a FISA on junk information (take that to the bank)

- This was also to help cover up previous unwarranted spying operations in violation of the law that may have been revealed with a Trump win

The Cancer Thinks It's The Body Politic 23.Jul.2018 23:01

Norman Ball

The Mueller Independent Counsel is like a Trumanite consulate within the resurgent Madisonian government spearheaded by Trump. Without Mueller's lingering presence, the Democrats (mantle-holders at the moment for the Deep State, along with some furtive Republican establishment support) would have no substantive speaking-role, outside of (are you ready?) Maxine Waters.

The Object of Mueller's investigation is not to go away. Mueller is the beachhead that invents incoming German artillery fire. The enemy is over the hill only because Mueller says he is. Culled from the same infernal cauldron as the War on Terror, Mueller emanates from nowhere and everywhere and is as durable as the capacity for human terror (i.e. inexhaustible). The perpetual motion machine from Lawfare Hell.

As Adam Hill points out, this in perpetuum feature accomplishes two simultaneous objectives. One, it permanently sub-optimizes Trump's Presidency and two, it permits Rosenstein to forever dish his favored response to Congressional questions: "I'm sorry I can't answer that question because of the ongoing nature of the investigation." Here's Hill:

... Rosenstein and others embarrassed by DOJ's actions may derive raison d'être, if not safety, from the never-ending nature of the investigation. And like Leonard Shelby's investigative file, the Russia investigation has become a puzzle that is designed to never be solved. Because to do so would end the "ongoing investigation" excuse that keeps the cause of DOJ's embarrassment under wraps.


The Mueller Mirror Tunnel 23.Jul.2018 23:04

^

where no reflection is your last!
The Object of Mueller's investigation is not to go away.
The Object of Mueller's investigation is not to go away.

Indicted Senate Staffer James Wolfe Leaked FISA Warrant To Reporter 24.Jul.2018 04:14

sundance

Indicted Senate Staffer James Wolfe Leaked a 2017 Copy of Full FISA Warrant Against Carter Page to Reporter Ali Watkins...

Posted on July 23, 2018 by sundance

Connecting the Wolfe indictment to the recently released Carter Page FISA application it becomes obvious in March 2017 Senate Staffer James Wolfe sent reporter Ali Watkins a copy of the 82-page FISA Title-1 origination application. Here's how we know:

On/around March 16th, 2017, the Senate Intelligence Committee requested a copy of the FISA application used against Carter Page. How do we know this? Because a part of the indictment against James Wolfe tells us what took place.

Page #5 of the Wolfe indictment (unsealed in June 2018) describes Reporter #2 Ali Watkins.

Page #6 describes one of the leaks; one of the very specific leaks by Wolfe to Watkins. Read carefully:

That document described is clearly the FISA application used against Carter Page that was disclosed Saturday. Note the description (above) and the date of the FISC release disclosed: March, 17th, 2017 - FISC CLERK COPY STAMP page 83

&#9830;Yes, that means the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) has had the FISA application against Carter Page in their possession since March 2017.

Next: Note the FISA application (original first application) is 83 pages, with a blank page. That's 82 pages total.

Note page #6 of the Wolfe indictment: "82 text messages" corresponds with James Wolfe texting 82 images of the FISA application to Ali Watkins. Wolfe likely took pictures of each application page and sent them to Ms. Watkins.

Important to note: depending on how the FISA copy was processed by the DOJ(?), and considering this was to the Senate Intel Committee, it is likely the SSCI copy was not heavily redacted (if at all).

&#9830;Yes, that means reporter Ali Watkins (Buzzfeed then New York Times) has had a copy of the original FISA application against Carter Page since March 17th, 2017.

&#9830;Yes, that also means the U.S. DOJ has known since December 15th, 2017, that SSCI Chief Staffer James Wolfe leaked the FISA application to the media in March 2017.

&#9830;Yes, that also means the U.S. DOJ has known the media has been holding a copy of the original FISA application since March 17th, 2017.

Further... .

SSCI Chairman Richard Burr and SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner are "Gang-of-Eight" intelligence oversight members.

They have top level security clearances, so they could/would be permitted to see the FISC release w/out redactions.

However, in March 2017, at the time this application was sent to the SSCI, there was also an ongoing Intelligence Community leak investigation taking place. Actually, more like a "leak hunt". This ongoing "leak hunt", in connection to the later capture of James Wolfe, becomes a more important consideration when you think about the recent FISA application public release.

From the Wolfe indictment we discover: On December 15th, 2017 James Wolfe was busted; the FBI had him dead-to-rights. However, the grand jury proceedings didn't start until May 3rd, 2018; and the indictment was sealed until June 7th, 2018. That means six months passed between busting Wolfe on Dec. 15th, 2017, and indicting Wolfe on June 7th, 2018.

It is difficult to gain a search and seizure warrant on a journalist. However, it is noted Reporter #2, Ms. Ali Watkins, was identified and an appropriate search warrant was authorized by the court. Ms. Watkins was notified after execution of the search warrant. February 13, 2018:

RECAP: Wolfe FBI interview 12/15/17; one search warrant executed Jan-Feb 2018; grand jury seated May 2018; indictment/arrest of Wolfe June 2018

Here is where it gets interesting. Back to the FISC application released. Remember, we must think of this release in four segments:

&#9830;Original application - Oct '16
&#9830;Renewal - Jan '17
&#9830;Renewal - April '17
&#9830;Renewal - June '17

However, when the FISA application was released publicly, *they* (unknown) released the March 17th, 2017 copy (the one sent to the SSCI) of the original.

Why release (segment #1) from the March 17th, 2017, copy?

The answer to that question goes back to the leak hunting taking place on/around March 17th, 2017, when the FISA application was first released to the SSCI.

*They* (again, unknown) likely put a subtle leak tracer in the FISC application when it was released. A slight variation in the copy sent to the SSCI that would help the leak hunters identify the leak, if the tracer information was found in media reporting.

So there is something slightly different about the March 17th, 2017, version of the Carter Page FISA application... . than the unmodified original version held at the FISC.

That is why the publicly released version has segment #1 dated as March 17th, 2017. Whoever made the decision to release the application needed to publicly release the same version as was previously used to track leakers.

NOTE: It is highly likely one of the "leak tracers" was to change the dates within the FISA application and/or the FISA renewal(s). This explains why the dates are all redacted in the recent release:
View this document on Scribd

.

Obviously, given the recent arrest of James Wolfe, and the ongoing hunt for more leakers, in hindsight we can see the justice value in maintaining this process. Indeed there were/are people within the intelligence apparatus that are leaking information. Those leakers are being hunted.

However, why was the Senate Intel Committee requesting the FISA application in the first place? (Back in March 2017) What was happening around the time the SSCI was making the requests? And why was the intelligence community (IC) so willing to comply with the SSCI request?

After all, the House Permanent Select Committee and the House Judiciary Committee had to threaten the Justice Department just to see a copy in January 2018. Why was the same apparatus so forthcoming in 2017 to the Senate Intelligence Committee?

Enter, former SSCI Chairman Dan Coats - now 2017 Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) in charge of the overall IC and stopping dangerous leaks. Apparently, and not coincidentally, Coats was confirmed two days before the March 17th, 2017, FISA application was released to the Senate Intel Committee.

In 2017 DNI Dan Coats is VERY closely connected to NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers. Both took/take their responsibilities *very* seriously. You could say, they partnered.

DNI Coats and NSA Rogers worked together on *all* the FISA concerns.

Coats/Rogers collective endeavors led to, and included, the April 2017 release of a brutal 99-page FISC review of FISA abuses. Coats and Rogers made the FISC ruling a matter of public record.

Their nemesis per se', are corrupt politicians like SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner who, on the same date (March 17th, 2017), was having covert contact with Christopher Steele via lobbyist Adam Waldman and former SSCI staffer Daniel Jones. READ:
View this document on Scribd

.

NOTE:

Common sense and our own independent research tells us that Dan Coats and Admiral Rogers knew the SSCI was corrupt, dangerous and likely leaking just to damage President Trump and protect their deep state interests. That's why the March 17th, 2017, released FISA application was seeded to trace a leaker.

That March 17th, 2017, SSCI leak hunt eventually led to the capture of James Wolfe, who sent reporter Ali Watkins 82 picture text messages (on the day he took custody) distributing the Carter Page FISA application to the media.

Ms. Ali Watkins, while sleeping with James Wolfe and receiving leaks as compensation, was working for Buzzfeed at the time, and wrote this. Ms. Watkins then went on to work for the New York Times.

Now remember, keeping all their activity in mind, AFTER March 17th, 2017, Ali Watkins held a copy of the Carter Page FISA application while she worked at both Buzzfeed and the New York Times. She knew the substance, the specific details, of the actual FISA application; and as a consequence so too did her employer(s). However, despite this actual knowledge Ms. Watkins and her colleagues continued to push a narrative, and write articles, that were factually false against the FISA application evidence she was holding.

&#9830; Meanwhile, after March 17th, 2017, Senate Intelligence Chairman Mark Warner also knew the substance of the Carter Page application as it was distributed to his committee. Yet he too continued to push a narrative what was fundamentally different from the first-hand information he reviewed.

We always knew Warner held a conflict; however, we had no idea the scope of the conflict he was concealing. Consider this statement from May of this year:

(LINK)

According to Mark Warner, it would be "irresponsible" and "potentially illegal" for congressional oversight to keep demanding records from the FBI and DOJ about their spying and surveillance activity against the campaign of Donald Trump... wait, what?

Senator Mark Warner was caught text messaging with DC Lawyer Adam Waldman in the spring of 2017 (his first assignment). Waldman was the lawyer for the interests of Christopher Steele - the author of the dossier. Warner was doing this at exactly the same time he was requesting and receiving the Carter Page FISA application.

While Adam Waldman was working as an intermediary putting Senator Warner and Christopher Steele in contact with each-other. Simultaneously Waldman was also representing the interests of... wait for it,... . Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska.

Derispaska was the Russian person approached by Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok and asked to assist in creating dirt on the Trump campaign, via Paul Manafort.

You see, Senator Mark Warner had/has a vested interest in making sure that no-one ever gets to the bottom of the 2016 political weaponization, spying and surveillance operation.

Senator Mark Warner was a participant in the execution of the "insurance policy" trying to remove President Trump via the Russian Collusion narrative.

Senator Feinstein's 2016 senior staffer (with Gang-of-Eight security clearance) was Dan Jones. It was recently revealed that Dan Jones contracted with Christopher Steele to continue work on the Russia conspiracy narrative after the 2016 election, and raised over $50 million toward the ideological goals of removing President Trump. {See Here}

Staffer Dan Jones surfaces in the text messages from Feinstein's replacement on the Gang-of-Eight, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman, Mark Warner {See Here}

Senator Warner was texting with Adam Waldman about setting up a meeting with Chris Steele. Waldman is a lobbyist/lawyer with a $40,000 monthly retainer to represent the U.S. interests of Russian billionaire Oleg V. Deripaska.

Senator Mark Warner was trying to set up a covert meeting. In the text messages Adam Waldman is telling Senator Warner that Chris Steele will not meet with him without a written letter (request) from the Senate Intelligence Committee. Senator Warner didn't want the Republican members to know about the meeting. Chris Steele knew this was a partisan political set-up and was refusing to meet unilaterally with Senator Warner. His lawyer Adam Waldman was playing the go-between:

That "Dan Jones", mentioned above, talking with Chris Steele and told to go to see Senator Warner, is the former senate staffer Dan Jones, who was previously attached to Dianne Feinstein.

Simultaneously, while working to connect Senator Warner to Christopher Steele, Adam Waldman is representing Oleg Deripaska:

(Source Link)

Oleg Deripaska was a source of intelligence information within the John Brennan intelligence community efforts throughout 2016. This is the same intersection of characters that circle around Stefan Halper.

John Solomon - [... ] Deripaska also appears to be one of the first Russians the FBI asked for help when it began investigating the now-infamous Fusion GPS "Steele Dossier." Waldman, his American lawyer until the sanctions hit, gave me a detailed account, some of which U.S. officials confirm separately.

Two months before Trump was elected president, Deripaska was in New York as part of Russia's United Nations delegation when three FBI agents awakened him in his home; at least one agent had worked with Deripaska on the aborted effort to rescue Levinson. During an hour-long visit, the agents posited a theory that Trump's campaign was secretly colluding with Russia to hijack the U.S. election. (more)

Now, for more motive for Senator Warner to keep sunlight from the operation, listen carefully to the opening statement from former CIA Director John Brennan May 23rd, 2017, during his testimony to congress.

Pay very close attention to the segment at 13:35 of this video of Brennan's testimony:

Brennan: [13:35] "Third, through the so-called Gang-of-Eight process we kept congress apprised of these issues as we identified them."

"Again, in consultation with the White House, I PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members."

"Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member."...

Here's the James Wolfe indictment:
View this document on Scribd
 http://www.scribd.com/doc/381310366


Mueller's History of Cover-Ups 25.Jul.2018 01:11

April 8, 2018

Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been in the news lately due to his inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections. After a 12-year stint leading the Bureau, the longest ever since J. Edgar Hoover, Mueller is now seen by many as an honest man serving the interest of the American public. However, that perception cannot be defended once one knows about Mueller's past.

What some people don't know about Mueller is that he has a long history of leading government investigations that were diversions or cover-ups. These include the investigation into the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, the investigation into the terrorist financing Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), and the FBI investigations into the crimes of September 11th, 2001. Today the public is beginning to realize that Mueller's investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign is a similar diversion.