Mueller’s RussiaGate Probe: Conflicts, Presuppositions and Special Interests

Sharing is Caring!

by Disobedient Media

Robert Mueller was the director of the FBI between 2001 and 2013, spanning both Bush and Obama administrations.

He was appointed as special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 United States general election on May 17, 2017.

Since his appointment, Mueller has been promoted as a champion of justice and a pursuer of truth by the mainstream press. He has been hailed as incorruptible by some and “America’s straightest arrow” by others.

However, history shows us that Mueller investigating anything may, inherently, come with disadvantages when it comes to the pursuit of truth.

Mueller’s Not-So-Stellar Past

According to whistleblowers, under Mueller’s leadership, crimes and scandals involving both government officials and the private-sector were ignored or covered-up by the FBI, and there are questions about further cover-ups before he became the agency director.

In July 2017, FBI whistleblower Coleen Rowley wrote an article titled “No, Robert Mueller And James Comey Aren’t Heroes” in which the author details the not-so-perfect history of both Mueller and Comey, suggesting that those lionizing the pair may be suffering from amnesia.

Rowley explains that Mueller and Comey presided over post-9/11 cover-ups, secret abuses against the Constitution, enabled Bush/Cheney fabrications used as the pretext for waging war and demonstrated incompetence. The article also references Mueller’s attempts to mislead everyone following 9/11 and Rowley’s efforts to challenge Mueller on his silence about what he knew.

Going further, Rowley covers Mueller’s bungled Amerithrax investigation that targeted an innocent manviolations of privacyinfiltration of non-violent anti-war groups and also references Mueller’s history before being director of the FBI:

Long before he became FBI Director, serious questions existed about Mueller’s role as Acting U.S. Attorney in Boston in effectively enabling decades of corruption and covering up of the FBI’s illicit deals with mobster Whitey Bulger and other “top echelon” informants who committed numerous murders and crimes. When the truth was finally uncovered through intrepid investigative reporting and persistent, honest judges, U.S. taxpayers footed a $100 million court award to the four men framed for murders committed by (the FBI operated) Bulger gang.

The revelations continue, from Mueller being OK with CIA conducting torture programs that his agents warned against and systematically covering up torture through to working on the prosecution of NSA and CIA whistleblowers who revealed illegalities and abuse.

Rowley’s article is detailed and well worth reading to get a good idea of the sort of track record Mueller has from a reputable and knowledgeable source.

Another article published a few months after Rowley’s piece, by author Jeffrey Marty, titled “Robert Mueller: Dirty Cop” highlights the list of failures to investigate and bring justice to those responsible of several high-profile crimes and corruption cases.

The list includes: falsification of Iraq war intelligence$12bn in currency sent to Iraq that then vanishedthe NSA’s warrantless surveillance, the Bush administration use of private mail servers for state business and mass-deletion of emailsClinton’s use of private mail servers for similar purposes (and recklessness with security), DOJ illegally seizing material from AP reportersClinton Foundation pay-to-playthe ATF fast and furious program and much more.

The article goes further, highlighting how the FBI and DOJ handled money laundering at HSBC involving hundreds of billions of dollars (for which they were fined and allowed to enter a deferred prosecution agreement) and how Comey joined their board of directors a few months later, followed by Mueller becoming a partner in the law firm that represented HSBC after he left the FBI.

Another article, published more recently (August 2018) and written by Patrick Howley reports that “An Army of FBI Whistleblowers Are Ready To Testify Against Mueller” stating:

These whistleblowers are prepared to testify under oath that Mueller committed perjury and other crimes in his effort to conceal massive off-the-books citizen surveillance programs rolled out in succession by the Bush and Obama administrations.

The article covers various statements made by Chuck Marler who had previously worked for the Special Surveillance Group (SSG) at the FBI.

Earlier this year, Republican congressman Louie Gohmert also highlighted various issues in a report titled “Robert Mueller Unmasked” that opened with a bold assertion:

“Robert Mueller has a long and sordid history of illicitly targeting innocent people that is a stain upon the legacy of American jurisprudence. He lacks the judgment and credibility to lead the prosecution of anyone.”

The report covers Mueller and his team’s history of indicting innocent parties as well as FBI abuses under Mueller’s leadership and his efforts to punish whistleblowers while retaining agents that provide false information.

Gohmert’s report explains that Mueller and members of his team have various conflicts of interest and argues that they should have recused themselves. It concludes with covering the abuse of FISC, the Steele dossier and other aspects of RussiaGate that Mueller’s probe seems to lack interest in.

Finally, on the topic of Mueller’s past, there is the incident where the FBI, under Mueller’s leadership, allegedly sent a ‘planeload’ of agents to Iceland for the purpose of framing Assange. This was reported by the Daily Mail in December 2017 in an article written by Anneta Konstantinides, titled: “Former Icelandic minister claims US sent ‘planeload of FBI agents to frame Julian Assange’ during mission to the country in 2011“.

The CrowdStrike Connection

CrowdStrike is a high-profile cybersecurity firm that worked with the DNC (Democratic National Committee) in 2016 and was called in due to a suspected breach.

However, CrowdStrike appears to have first started working with the DNC approximately five weeks prior to this and approximately just five days after John Podesta (Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager for the 2016 election) had his Gmail account phished.

Nothing was mentioned about this until after the five weeks had passed when the DNC published a press release stating that CrowdStrike had been at the DNC throughout that period to investigate the NGP-VAN issues (that had occurred three months before Podesta was phished).

Upon conclusion of those five weeks, CrowdStrike was immediately called back in to investigate a suspected breach.

CrowdStrike’s software was already installed on the DNC network when the DNC emails were acquired but CrowdStrike failed to prevent the emails from being acquired and didn’t publish logs or incident-specific evidence of the acquisition event either, the latter of which is odd considering what their product’s features were advertised to be even if they were just running it in a monitoring capacity.

There are additional questions to be asked about why Guccifer 2.0 went to the effort he did to fabricate Russian-themed evidence (discovered in 2017 and 2018 but largely ignored by the press), bizarrely supporting some of the most significant claims made by CrowdStrike just one day earlier.

If Mueller’s attribution of Guccifer 2.0 to the GRU is correct, why would the GRU want to fabricate evidence to support CrowdStrike’s allegations against Russia when another one of CrowdStrike’s directors conceded they had no hard evidence at the time? This issue has not yet been adequately explained.

All of these oddities are relevant because one of the two CrowdStrike executives that had helped push the story to the press was a former department director at the FBI serving under Robert Mueller, and, judging on the fact they were dining together at an executive retreat after that individual had retired, it would seem that they are friends too.


Mueller’s probe was never set up to find the truth about the DNC leak or the Guccifer 2.0 persona.  The objective was to find evidence to support the RussiaGate conspiracy theory rather than to thoroughly investigate all evidence no matter where it leads.

Even if finding the truth was Mueller’s objective, there’s little reason to believe that he could have investigated this impartially due to his associations, little reason to expect him to get conclusive results due to his history and little reason to think he would have the inclination to investigate fully due to his inaction and lack of interest in what was reported to him over a year ago.

It should, therefore, come as no surprise that there are a number of significant problems with Mueller’s indictment of GRU officers, and no evidence has been provided to explain how individual attributions were made.

For all we know, Mueller and company could have simply taken names obtained from intelligence on the OPCW hacking bust that actually occurred three months prior to the indictment and attributed names of GRU officers on a ‘best-fit’ basis to roles identified in their investigation

The bottom line is that Mueller’s investigation has not fully investigated RussiaGate and it appears that his investigation has avoided certain paths including those that would result in CrowdStrike being investigated or that relate to evidence that contradicts the specific conspiracy theory he has been tasked to investigate.

There is no point expecting the whole truth to arise from a restrictive probe that only seeks evidence supporting a single specific conspiracy theory from someone who presided over a decade of reported cover-ups at the FBI (and  alleged framing of Assange), whose personal associations introduce conflicts of interest and who seems to have selectively disregarded evidence where it conflicts with the theory being pursued.

If you want the whole truth about what happened in 2016, it seems that an independent commission may be the only way you’ll get close to it.


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.