There are several signs of renewed fight against Special Counsel Robert Mueller emerging from the beginning stages of our circulation of the Mueller dossier. Here is a roundup:
A widely published AP wire from the evening of Oct. 10, claims that there is a split in the Trump camp among those cautioning Trump to avoid antagonizing Mueller and those urging the President to engage in aggressive war against him. Those urging aggressive war cite Trump's lawyers, who are cooperating with Mueller, as dangerously naïve. As we have repeatedly pointed out, the President himself would be wise not to personally war against Mueller. Rather, the public should be chopping Mueller's undeserved reputation to bits and demanding that Congress end this fiasco. The President should concentrate on the flanks, opening the 9/11 flank on the Saudis with all its implications for Mueller and joining the New Silk Road, making good on his campaign promises. That's why we are the indispensable element in winning this war.
The Washington Post published an Op-Ed on Oct. 11, entitled, "Robert Mueller cannot save us," by resident new Resist member and WAPO editorial board member, Quinta Jurecic, praising Mueller, literally, as an epic Deep State hero, the anti-Trump, but bemoaning the prospect that Mueller will probably find no illegalities by the President himself. She calls for direct action. This is significant, because she is also an associate editor of Benjamin Witte's Lawfare blog, which was a leak point and cheerleader for former FBI Director James Comey.
Senator Chuck Grassley, clearly acting on some sort of tip, issued a letter to the FBI on October 6th, seeking clarification of any alleged confirmation of information in the phony British Christopher Steele dossier. Grassley says he wants to know whether any details of the dossier are the result of confirmations by foreign intelligence services rather than U.S. investigators. He says, for example, that the UK intelligence services received the dossier, and could be claiming to validate portions of the dossier without really disclosing the basis for any such finding, in effect recirculating the same fabricated allegations but giving a foreign state imprimatur to the self-same nonsense. Unsaid in Grassley's letter is that almost all the claims in Russia-gate have been sourced from the British and allied spook agencies without further presentation of evidence on the U.S. side. That includes the FBI's reliance on Crowdstrike for its forensics on the DNC and Podesta computers.
In fact, the lack of such evidence was made clear by the pathetic presentation on October 4th by Senators Mark Warner and Richard Burr, to the effect that Senate Intelligence has no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia after reviewing thousands of pages of documents and interviewing hundreds of witnesses, but that they nonetheless believe that the Russians meddled in the 2016 election because the intelligence agencies say so, but have not been able to conclude that the Russians had any electoral preferences!
On the House side, the media was in a frenzy on Oct. 10 and 11, because House Intelligence Committee chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes, signed subpoenas from the Committee delivered to Fusion GPS regarding the infamous British Steele dossier. Turns out that the entire GOP majority on the Intelligence Committee was behind the subpoenas seeking information about who paid for the dodgy dossier and how it was circulated. Fusion GPS is presently defending four defamation lawsuits by private citizens defamed in Steele's dossier and is obviously seeking to avoid truth telling. The actions by Nunes and Grassley followed reports of Mueller himself meeting with the British fabricator, Christopher Steele.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry has published two useful articles at Consortium News (see Russia-gate Jumps the Shark and The Mystery of the Russia-gate Puppies) during the same period, dealing with the various claims by Mark Warner and the media that the pesky Russians infiltrated the American mind and switched the results of the election via Google search mechanisms and Facebook ads. Parry points out, Facebook only came up with what it calls Russian-linked ads — meaning that someone with a Russian name, bank account, or web address purchased the ads — after Senator Mark Warner publicly threatened the company. Warner sits on key committees regulating the internet. Among the devious devices used by the clever Russians to lure Americans in, according to Warner and the media, were pictures of puppies. Those familiar with Facebook marketing know that pictures of puppies are the most widely employed click bait in all Facebook advertising.
Finally, Scott Balber, the lawyer for the Agalarov family involved in the June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower, has released emails leading up to that entrapment attempt. The newly-released emails clearly show all involved, other than British publicist Rob Goldstone, to have considered this a meeting on the Magnitsky Act sanctions against Russia and not for purposes of offering official Russian government dirt on Hillary Clinton to the Trump campaign. The release fully supports the claims of the Trump team that the meeting went nowhere and did not involve what was stated in Goldstone's fabricated email. They also support the EIR "Mueller dossier's" conclusion that the meeting was a British-orchestrated entrapment.