Federal Judge Delivers a Stinging Rebuke of Mueller’s False Conclusions


A most astounding revelation in a piece by Aaron Maté at RealClearInvestigations is a must-read but it’s ignored by the media. In his article, he points to a stinging rebuke by a federal judge of Robert Mueller for the FALSE conclusions in his report. That is, Mueller never proved the Kremlin was engaged in troll farm ‘Russian interference.’

Robert Mueller claimed the “central allegation” of the two-year Russia probe was the Russian government’s “multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every American.”

It was in Obama’s definitive January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, when James Clapper told the Senate with “high confidence” that Russia conducted a sweeping 2016 election influence campaign. “I don’t think we’ve ever encountered a more aggressive or direct campaign to interfere in our election process,” he declared.

We later discovered, but nothing was made of it, that the ads by private Russian companies were insignificant in number and childishly written.

Now a federal judge issued a stinging rebuke of the core Mueller claim. Mueller insisted the IRA — a Russian troll farm — was the second of “two principal interference operations” by the Russian government. But the judge found Mueller’s implied link between the IRA troll farm and the Russian government was FALSE (a lie?).


Maté writes: In a newly unsealed July 1 ruling, a federal judge rebuked Mueller and the Justice Department for having “improperly suggested a link” between the IRA and the Russian government. U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich said Mueller’s February 2018 indictment “does not link the [IRA] to the Russian government” and alleges “only private conduct by private actors.” The judge added the government’s statements violate a prohibiting lawyer from making claims that would prejudice a case.

This is the case of the Concord Management & Consulting firm, a Russian company that was cited by Mueller as Russian operatives in Russian election interference. They sued in U.S. courts to clear their name.

This does not prove there wasn’t a link. It only proves Mueller DIDN’T PROVE IT.

Mueller never connected the two except to say the IRA had Kremlin ties. Mueller NEVER establishes a Russia connection.

Mueller says the social media operation was the second major component of a “sweeping and systematic” Russian gov’t interference campaign. Yet he never actually shows how it’s connected to the Russian government.

The entire “Russian Active Measures” talking point collapses under this revelation.

Mr. Maté tweets: given how disingenuous Mueller is overall — ignoring the Steele dossier; obscuring how weak the official Papadopoulos predicate; omitting Kilimnik’s extensive State Dept ties & falsely hyping him as GRU indictment — this is only the latest example.

It’s not only a judge recognizing this, it’s one of Mueller’s own prosecutors. At a May 28 hearing, Jonathan Kravis said: “The report does not say that the Russian government participated in” the troll farm’s activity.

Mueller’s report gives the distinctly false impression that the Russian government was involved by including it as one of two “principal” Russian interference “operations.”

The former special counsel never showed the Russian government engaged with the troll farm yet he implied it over and over.


Maté also states what we have heard before — the ads were ridiculously insignificant in any case: Even putting aside the complete absence of a Kremlin role, the case that the Russian government sought to influence the U.S. election via a social media campaign is hard to grasp given how minuscule it was. Mueller says the IRA spent $100,000 between 2015 and 2017.  Of that, just $46,000 was spent on Russian-linked Facebook ads before the 2016 election. That amounts to about 0.05% of the $81 million spent on Facebook ads by the Clinton and Trump campaigns combined — which is itself a tiny fraction of the estimated $2 billion spent by the candidates and their supporting PACS.


I encourage people to read the entire article if they are interested in this topic. He also wrote this article on the topic prior to the new revelations.

  • The Mueller report confirmed the use of news reports in their investigation. When it was revealed that the IRA interfered in the US election news reports surfaced from years earlier that specified the same details as Mueller used. Many speculated that was the source Mueller used for his charges. Mueller would be certain no one from the IRA would travel to the US to answer the charges. This is separate from Concord. I believe the Concord company was started After all this.

  • Cold Feet?????Special counsel Robert Mueller’s public testimony before Congress is likely to be postponed until July 24,

  • Now we can understand the demeanor of Mueller at the press conference. It was given the day after. It was a quick CYA. I noted that he looked almost on the verge of tears. Evidently the judge was prepared to “lay the law down” on the prosecution. It’s now no surprise that Mueller said “the report is his testimony”.

    There’s been some confusion but the hearing may be postponed a week and just may not happen at all. He can get by with refusing to answer questions on this case as it is ongoing but questions Should be asked about the lack of evidence of Russia.

  • Adam Mill, a pen name, wrote an article in the Federalist on this subject and makes this point in the end:

    “All over the world, private citizens try to influence American politics using Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and any other internet-based application that offers some promise of playing a role in the most important political contests in the world. Is that a bad thing? If you believe in robust free speech, it isn’t.”

    The First Amendment guarantees us free speech but that Constitution is the US Constitution. “do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”. I suppose this Adam Mill believes his libertarian philosophy is not exclusive for a sovereign nation. His thinking negates entirely that which brought about Independence. Why not allow foreign nationals to campaign with and for a candidate. Why not allow Steele to campaign directly for Hillary rather than create a dossier. I’m seeing great similarity between Libertarian and Anarchists. The only difference is Libertarians want order whereas Anarchists do not. Both seem to want to remove the constraints that define a country. Would the founding Federalists agree with some of their modern counterparts.

  • Back to the beginning…There was no hack…there was a download…the entire farce was perpetrated to deflect the WikiLeaks – which have NEVER been debunked – “dump” on Hillary…it morphed into Russiagate and Mueller’s scam. There would have been a line of wannabe politicians with bags of cash vying for the Russian “expertise”that could swing the US presidential elections for UNDER $100,000.00 in facebook ads….