Opinion Of Elder Patriot 7/10/19 – During a hearing to determine whether Rule 57.7 was violated by Robert Mueller’s unproven claims that the Russian government had meddled in the 2016 presidential election, U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich completely undermined the underlying premise of the special counsel’s Russian collusion delusion.

Rule 57.7 prohibits lawyers from expressing opinion that would prejudice a case.  

Judge Friedrich agreed with attorneys for Concord Management and Consulting, one of the alleged Russian troll farms, who argued that the special counsel Robert Mueller’s conclusion that the Russian ‘troll farms” were operating under the direction of the Kremlin had never been proven by the special counsel.

Concord’s lawyers argued that the Mueller Report contained allegations against their clients that were not included in the indictment, to this day remain unproven, and that would serve as “a sword to prejudice Concord, and a shield to hide discovery.”

Writing in response to a contempt request made by lawyers for Concord Management and Consulting on behalf of its owner Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, Judge Friedrich wrote a 23-page opinion rebuking the special counsel for falsely suggesting Concord was tied to the Kremlin.

Despite containing 448-pages of innuendo and allegations, the Mueller Report never proved the involvement of the Russian government in its findings.  Curiously, Mueller’s highly publicized indictment of Concord also failed to make that claim: 

From the RCI report:

While the 448-page Mueller report found no conspiracy between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia, it offered voluminous details to support the sweeping conclusion that the Kremlin worked to secure Trump’s victory. The report claims that the interference operation occurred “principally” on two fronts: Russian military intelligence officers hacked and leaked embarrassing Democratic Party documents, and a government-linked troll farm orchestrated a sophisticated and far-reaching social media campaign that denigrated Hillary Clinton and promoted Trump.

But a close examination of the report shows that none of those headline assertions are supported by the report’s evidence or other publicly available sources. They are further undercut by investigative shortcomings and the conflicts of interest of key players involved. 

Whoa!  The special counsel spent $40 Million, investigated for 22 months, reviewed millions of documents, and never proved the premise that served as the basis for its existence – that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election!

Though they claimed it often and publicly.

It was all innuendo that, along with assistance from the lapdog propagandist media, was intended to destroy the presidency of a duly elected president.

We’ve long wanted to know why the special counsel’s team never deposed Julian Assange, the head of WikiLeaks, the organization that was accused of being the conduit by which Russia allegedly released the information garnered from Russian hacking operations.

Now we know why.  Mueller wasn’t interested in determining the truth.  He was intent on taking down President Trump.

Mark Siidney

Father, Husband, Son. Mark is just a regular guy from a blue color family who writes opinion articles. Mark has Economics & Political Science degrees from Rutgers University.

View all posts

Add comment