- Joined
- Feb 24, 2013
- Messages
- 40,268
- Reaction score
- 23,949
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Key figure that Mueller report linked to Russia was a State Department intel source | TheHill
But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters.
Why Mueller’s team omitted that part of the Kilimnik narrative from its report and related court filings is not known. But the revelation of it comes as the accuracy of Mueller’s Russia conclusions face increased scrutiny.
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.
.... How can Kilimnick be a known intelligence source for the State Department and have that not be mentioned in the Mueller report? :roll:
That article is eye opening
Key figure that Mueller report linked to Russia was a State Department intel source | TheHill
But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters.
Why Mueller’s team omitted that part of the Kilimnik narrative from its report and related court filings is not known. But the revelation of it comes as the accuracy of Mueller’s Russia conclusions face increased scrutiny.
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.
.... How can Kilimnick be a known intelligence source for the State Department and have that not be mentioned in the Mueller report? :roll:
The Mueller team appears to have intentionally lied through misrepresentation. He knew that Kilimnick was not a Russian agent, but that fact was classified, so he could use Kilimnick to build his case against Manafort knowing that it would be a federal offense to divulge proof that Kilimnick was actually an Intel source for the United States.
You do understand that this is not "Breaking News", and that John Solomon is an opinion writer for The Hill, right?
You do understand that this is not "Breaking News", and that John Solomon is an opinion writer for The Hill, right?
Key figure that Mueller report linked to Russia was a State Department intel source | TheHill
But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters.
Why Mueller’s team omitted that part of the Kilimnik narrative from its report and related court filings is not known. But the revelation of it comes as the accuracy of Mueller’s Russia conclusions face increased scrutiny.
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.
.... How can Kilimnick be a known intelligence source for the State Department and have that not be mentioned in the Mueller report? :roll:
The Mueller team appears to have intentionally lied through misrepresentation. He knew that Kilimnick was not a Russian agent, but that fact was classified, so he could use Kilimnick to build his case against Manafort knowing that it would be a federal offense to divulge proof that Kilimnick was actually an Intel source for the United States.
That article is eye opening
It is breaking news, Tres, and it is an expose that was released late last night. This isn't an opinion piece, it is a story reporting newly discovered facts. Do you have anything meaningful to add to the discussion?
Key figure that Mueller report linked to Russia was a State Department intel source | TheHill
But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters.
Why Mueller’s team omitted that part of the Kilimnik narrative from its report and related court filings is not known. But the revelation of it comes as the accuracy of Mueller’s Russia conclusions face increased scrutiny.
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.
.... How can Kilimnick be a known intelligence source for the State Department and have that not be mentioned in the Mueller report? :roll:
The Mueller team appears to have intentionally lied through misrepresentation. He knew that Kilimnick was not a Russian agent, but that fact was classified, so he could use Kilimnick to build his case against Manafort knowing that it would be a federal offense to divulge proof that Kilimnick was actually an Intel source for the United States.
No one cares about what you just wrote.
It isn't breaking news. It's Solomon's opinion. Breaking news is "Policeman shot by man" or "Trump signs Infrastructure bill into law" or "Ford announces 2500 layoffs".
This is his opinion on the Mueller report.
Part of the redacted? He's probably still a source.
What the Mueller report contains and does not contain is a fact. Assigning a motive for that report's content may be an opinion, but the report's content is a fact.
It isn't breaking news. It's Solomon's opinion. Breaking news is "Policeman shot by man" or "Trump signs Infrastructure bill into law" or "Ford announces 2500 layoffs".
This is his opinion on the Mueller report.
It's not opinion. It is stating a statement of facts about Kilimnick's actual identity which is at odds with the portrayal of Kilimnick by Mueller, and countless exposes written over the last 3 years tying Trump to Russia through Kilimnick.
Agreed. But this is Solomon's opinion piece. It isn't Breaking News.
Maybe you know - which MSM outlet has used Solomon's opinion piece and declared it breaking news at this point? I just looked at Fox News, and don't see it there.
Agreed. But this is Solomon's opinion piece. It isn't Breaking News.
Maybe you know - which MSM outlet has used Solomon's opinion piece and declared it breaking news at this point? I just looked at Fox News, and don't see it there.
In an email exchange Friday with The Washington Post, Kilimnik said the 448-page report by Robert S. Mueller III paints a false picture of his role, including the assessment by the FBI that he has ties to Russian intelligence.
“I have no ties to Russian or, for that matter, any intelligence operation,” he wrote in an email. “This is one of the biggest mistakes in the public perception and in the report. It is simply not based on any facts and is a made-up narrative.”
More broadly, Kilimnik said, “I absolutely have zero to do with the Russia interference in the U.S. elections investigated by Mr. Mueller.”
According to Mueller’s report, investigators were not able to determine what Kilimnik did with the data, noting that it was among the topics about which Manafort lied to prosecutors. But the report said that multiple emails Kilimnik sent to U.S. associates and media contacts in late summer 2016 referred to “internal polling” and described the state of the Trump campaign.
Kilimnik said he never had a chance to explain his interactions with Manafort because Mueller’s investigators did not contact him.
It's not an opinion piece, Tres, as much as you want it to be. If all it took was a journalist drawing conclusions from evidence to make it an opinion piece then the *Breaking News* forum would be devoid of articles to discuss.
No point in entertaining your desperate diversion tactic any further.
Key figure that Mueller report linked to Russia was a State Department intel source | TheHill
But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the U.S. State Department who informed on Ukrainian and Russian matters.
Why Mueller’s team omitted that part of the Kilimnik narrative from its report and related court filings is not known. But the revelation of it comes as the accuracy of Mueller’s Russia conclusions face increased scrutiny.
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.
.... How can Kilimnick be a known intelligence source for the State Department and have that not be mentioned in the Mueller report? :roll:
The Mueller team appears to have intentionally lied through misrepresentation. He knew that Kilimnick was not a Russian agent, but that fact was classified, so he could use Kilimnick to build his case against Manafort knowing that it would be a federal offense to divulge proof that Kilimnick was actually an Intel source for the United States.
News outlets should not use an opinion piece as "breaking news" but to assert that this has not been reported is BS.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...bc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.41673cb186a9
I haven't searched here, but has anyone printed the news that the Mueller report intentionally edited a transcript of a phone conversation, removing exculpatory passages? Because yeah, he did that as well.
You posted an article from Wapo dated April 19. What does it have to do with Solomon's opinion piece from yesterday? You mean Wapo scooped this "breaking news" almost 2 months ago?
News outlets should not use an opinion piece as "breaking news" but to assert that this has not been reported is BS.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...bc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.41673cb186a9
The opinion piece is an attempt to assign a motive for what was and was not included in the Mueller report - what I provided was from the horse's mouth, so to speak, as to what Mueller reported about Kilimnik. Most notable was the fact that Mueller (et al) never talked to Kilimnik (thus relied on hearsay?).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?