Why didn’t Mueller charge Joseph Mifsud for lying to the FBI? pic.twitter.com/34E6TSigcM
— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) July 24, 2019
Evidence reveals FBI agents charged with investigating the Russia scandal may have misrepresented – or at the very least withheld – facts about the U.S. intelligence community’s relationship with Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor at the center of the SpyGate affair.
The U.S. intelligence community was allegedly aware of Mifsud as early as 2014 – two years before his statements would help to start SpyGate and three years before he was questioned by the FBI about them.
Joseph Mifsud allegedly told Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. That statement would begin the Russia affair, the allegation the 2016 Donald Trump campaign was colluding with the Russian government to interfere in that year’s election.
Mifsud was associated with Link University at the time, the institution in Rome, Italy, with a long history of being a gathering place for global intelligence officials.
The FBI interviewed Mifsud in February 2017 at the Omni Hotel in Washington D.C. During that interview Mifsud denied making any such statements to Papadopoulos.
“Misfud stated he had no advance knowledge Russia was in possession of emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and, therefore, did not make any offers or proffer any information to Papadopoulos…Papadopoulos must have misunderstood their conversation,” the FBI’s interview report quotes Mifsud as saying.
The Joseph Mifsud 302: pic.twitter.com/VQAMcJDaS9
— FOOL NELSON ⏳ (@FOOL_NELSON) September 2, 2020
Mifsud would make other statement that would be proven false by investigators. The Mueller report states:
“…Mifsud denied that he had advance knowledge that Russia was in possession of emails damaging to candidate Clinton, stating that he and Papadopoulos had discussed cybersecurity and hacking as a larger issue and that Papadopoulos must have misunderstood their conversation. Mifsud also falsely stated that he had not seen Papadopoulos since the meeting at which Mifsud introduced him to [Olga] Polonskaya, even though emails, text messages, and other information show that Mifsud met with Papadopoulos on at least two other occasions—April 12 and April 26, 2016. In addition, Mifsud omitted that he had drafted (or edited) the follow-up message that Polonskaya sent to Papadopoulos following the initial meeting and that, as reflected in the language of that email chain (‘Baby, thank you!’), Mifsud may have been involved in a personal relationship with Polonskaya at the time.”
Mueller never indicted Mifsud for making false statements to his investigators although he indicted several other individuals – including Papadopoulos – for doing just that.
In fact, not only did Mueller not indict Mifsud, but remarkably his team blamed Papadopoulos for those false statements. “The false information and omissions in Papadopoulos’s January 2017 interview undermined investigators’ ability to challenge Mifsud when he made these inaccurate statements,” Mueller’s report adds.
It would later be revealed that the February 2017 interview may not have been not the first interaction the U.S. intelligence community had with Mifsud.
Attorney Sidney Powell, who signed on to defend General Michael Flynn against charges stemming from SpyGate, filed a motion in October 2019 compelling a court to compel the government to produce 2 Blackberry devices that were said to contain evidence proving Flynn’s innocence.
“This information is material, exculpatory, and relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn, and specifically to the ‘OCONUS LURES’ and agents that western intelligence tasked against him likely as early as 2014 to arrange—unbeknownst to him—’connections’ with certain Russians that they would then use against him in their false claims,” Powell’s court filing states.
“The phones were used by Mr. Joseph Mifsud,” it adds.
How did the FBI come to be in possession of phones known to have been used by Joseph Mifsud? Why did they withhold them from Flynn and his legal team? What bearing did the fact Mifsud was known to the U.S. IC have on the Mueller team’s prosecution of Papadopoulos after it became clear the entire affair allegedly started with him?
The answers to these questions have serious implications.
If Mifsud was a member of Western intelligence that would mean his statements to Papadopoulos, and any involvement with Flynn’s case, could be considered entrapment. If he is not a member of Western intelligence that would make Mueller’s decision not to indict someone whose name kept popping up in circumstances where U.S. national security is allegedly compromised all the more bizarre.
Mueller was asked about Mifsud by Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan (R) during testimony before the House of Representatives in July 2019.
“Why didn’t you charge [Mifsud] with a crime?” Jordan asks. “I can’t get into internal deliberations with regards to who would or would not have been charged,” Mueller responds.
“Is Mifsud a member of Western intelligence?” Jordan asks. “I can’t get into that,” Mueller answers.
These facts are viewed with fresh perspective in light of the ItalyGate accusations that have been revealed in recent weeks. Those allegations state former President Barack Obama conspired with Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi to unravel the Trump presidency in late 2016/early 2017.
These operations were funded with $400 million the Obama administration had earmarked for Iran but were secretly funneled to Italy.