Newly Uncovered Omissions in Mueller Report Are Egregious


Robert Mueller’s report is filled with inaccuracies and it’s not surprising that John Solomon exposed a very serious omission Thursday evening. It is so significant that it brings the entire Mueller report into question.

One of the key figures that Mueller linked to Russia, a man he made into a shady character, was actually an important State Department intelligence source. He was the opposite of what Mueller made him out to be.

Ukrainian businessman Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, is an important figure in tying the Trump campaign to Russia in the Mueller report. But he was one of the good guys whom our State Department trusted.

Solomon writes:

The incomplete portrayal of Kilimnik is so important to Mueller’s overall narrative that it is raised in the opening of his report. “The FBI assesses” Kilimnik “to have ties to Russian intelligence,” Mueller’s team wrote on page 6, putting a sinister light on every contact Kilimnik had with Manafort, the former Trump campaign chairman.

Mueller had to know that Kilimnik was a very important source for the State Department, so much so that he interacted with the chief political officer at the U.S. embassy in Kiev, sometimes several times a week.

Knowing Kilimnik was one of the most reliable sources for our State Department, did not deter Mueller from falsely painting him as a Russian asset.

Another omission is the fact that the peace plan Kilimnik offered the Trump team was also offered to Barack Obama months before by Kilimnik.

Solomon writes:

So, Kilimnik’s delivery of the peace plan to the Trump campaign in August 2016 was flagged by Mueller as potentially nefarious, but its earlier delivery to the Obama administration wasn’t mentioned.

These are very serious omissions with one-sided portraits of the characters involved to deliberately cast suspicions on the Trump team.

Solomon concludes:

If Mueller’s team can cast such a misleading portrayal of Kilimnik, however, it begs the question of what else might be incorrect or omitted in the report.

Attorney General William Barr has said some of the Mueller report’s legal reasoning conflicts with Justice Department policies. And former Trump attorney John Dowd made a compelling case that Mueller’s report wrongly portrayed a phone message he left for a witness.

A few more such errors and omissions and Americans may begin to wonder if the Mueller report is worth the paper on which it was printed.


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments