Russian Collusion Lies Recycled Yet Again

It was a lie then, and it's a lie now.

On February 20th, 2025, UPI helpfully noted that it was four years ago on that day that I was sentenced to 40 years in prison based on my conviction in the Soviet-style show trial that I was subjected to in Washington D.C. in 2020.

Needless to day, UPI neglected to mention that President Donald Trump not only commuted my sentence, but on December 23rd, 2020, Issued me a full and unconditional presidential pardon.

More strikingly, UPI also failed to note that after my trial, a lawsuit by Buzzfeed against the DOJ forced the department to release the full un-redacted version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's full report which proved, definitively, that Mueller had "no factual basis" to prosecute me for Russian collusion, collaborations with WikiLeaks, or for that matter, any other crime, which is why I was indicted on clever and convoluted process charges in order to pressure me to testify falsely against President Donald Trump which I, of course, refused to do.

Specifically, Mueller's long-hidden, long-redacted final report noted:

Specifically, the newly unveiled documents say:

On Page 178:

“The Office’s determination that it could not charge WikiLeaks or Stone as part of the Section 1030 conspiracy was also informed by the constitutional issues that such a prosecution would present. Under the Supreme Court’s decision in Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001), the First Amendment protects a party’s publication of illegally intercepted communications on a matter of public concern, even when the publishing parties knew or had reason to know of the intercepts’ unlawful origin.”

Also Page 178:

“The Office determined that it could not pursue a Section 1030 conspiracy charge against Stone for some of the same legal reasons. The most fundamental hurdles, though, are factual ones.1279 As explained in Volume I, Section III.D.1, supra, Corsi’s accounts of his interactions with Stone on October 7, 2016 are not fully consistent or corroborated. Even if they were, neither Corsi’s testimony nor other evidence currently available to the Office is sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Stone knew or believed that the computer intrusions were ongoing at the time he ostensibly encouraged or coordinated the publication of the Podesta emails. Stone’s actions would thus be consistent with (among other things) a belief that he was aiding in the dissemination of the fruits of an already completed hacking operation perpetrated by a third party, which would be a level of knowledge insufficient to establish conspiracy liability. See State v. Phillips, 82 S.E.2d 762, 766 (N.C. 1954) (“In the very nature of things, persons cannot retroactively conspire to commit a previously consummated crime.”) (quoted in Model Penal Code and Commentaries § 5.03, at 442 (1985).

“Regardless, success would also depend upon evidence of WikiLeaks’s and Stone’s knowledge of ongoing or contemplated future computer intrusions-the proof that is currently lacking.”

Judge Amy Berman withheld this from my lawyers at trial. The Mueller’s dirty cops concluded in their report that even if they had found evidence that I had received documents from Assange of WikiLeaks and passed them to anyone, which I did not and for which they found no evidence whatsoever, it would not have been illegal. The whole thing was a hoax.

After being unconstitutionally gagged before, during, and after my trial, as well as being banned for life on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, I was ultimately reinstated on X (formerly Twitter), as well as establishing a healthy following on Truth Social, finally affording me the opportunity to layout the facts regarding the legal lynching I was subjected to, as well as the ongoing smears of a number of X trolls who continue to accuse me falsely of being a “Russian traitor.”

Here are the facts:

Anyone who actually followed my trial would know the federal prosecutors provided no evidence whatsoever of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign at my trial. In fact, in pretrial motions, the government moved that they did not have to prove that there was any Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, or that the Democratic National Committee had, in fact, been the target of an online hack with the purloined data going to WikiLeaks in order to convict me. The Judge granted their motion.

Those who actually followed my legal lynching in a DC Courtroom would also know the Judge denied my defense attorney a sealed report from the private company Crowdstrike, retained by the DNC, that supposedly contained proof of this Russian hack. Only when the sworn testimony of Crowdstrike Head Shaun Henry (conveniently a former deputy to Robert Mueller at the FBI) was declassified and released did we learn that Crowstrike had no proof whatsoever that the Russians conducted an online hack of the DNC. It was in my trial that the DOJ admitted that, for some strange reason, the FBI never inspected the DNC computer servers to detect whether there was an online hack. Given their role in directing the silencing of pro-Trump voices on Twitter we now see why.

I was convicted of “lying to congress” in my voluntary testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, despite the lack of any motive on my part to lie. There was no Russian collusion, or WikiLeaks collaboration to lie about. In fact, no misstatement that I made under oath was material or hid any underlying crime, never mind Russian collusion. The prosecutors provided no proof that I was a go-between for Wikileaks and the Trump campaign as the fake news media had more than speculated about or that I had any involvement in the timing of the devastating Wikileaks disclosures that rocked Hillary Clinton back on her heels. The idea that I was “covering up for Donald Trump” as the Judge said in her sentencing tirade against me is false. There was nothing to cover up.

Even the much-hyped claim that my innocuous Twitter Direct Message exchange with the persona of Guccifer 2.0 who then CIA Director John Brennan and then FBI Director James Comey insist is a Russian intelligence asset, is flawed. The 28-word exchange itself is innocuous, it took place three months after WikiLeaks had already published the DNC material meaning my involvement would have been chronologically impossible and the insistence that Guccifer 2.0 is in fact, a Russian spy is contradicted by substantial evidence that he is a US intelligence created operative.

Even if he was a Russian hacker, my limited exchange with him provides no evidence that we coordinated or colluded in any way. I myself fully released our Twitter DM exchange, and I voluntarily turned it over to the House Intelligence Committee when I testified. It proves nothing. Nonetheless, when I was pardoned, Mueller attacked me in a Washington Post OP-ED (probably ghostwritten by Weissmann) in which Mueller said I was “communicating with ‘Russian Intelligence asset(s)”. It’s another fugazi!

Federal prosecutors in my trial insisted that my case had to be in front of Judge Amy Berman Jackson because my case was “related to” the case Mueller brought against 17 alleged Russian intelligence agents, a case that has never even gone to discovery, never mind trial. In fact, Assistant US Attorney Jonathan Kravis told the Judge that Federal Prosecutors who present evidence against me gleaned against me in search warrants in that case at trial but never did. That’s because no such evidence exists.

The Judge denied my lawyers attempt to introduce forensic evidence or expert testimony to challenge the claim that the DNC had been hacked by the Russians. When my lawyers challenged the Government’s lack of evidence of a Russian hack of the DNC, the underlying premise of my indictment, Kravis filed a rare sur reply with the Court insisting the Government had proof beyond the Crowdstike’s report that the Russians hacked the DNC. They don’t.

Nor would most of the public know that on November 3, 2020, only by court order, in a lawsuit brought by Buzzfeed did the Department of Justice released the last remaining redacted and long hidden portions of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s final report in which even he could not sugarcoat the fact that, despite his wide and unprecedented legal authority and an unlimited budget, he could find “no factual evidence” that I had engaged in Russian collusion, WikiLeaks collaboration, or had played any role in the phishing or publication of John Podesta’s highly embarrassing emails. Only Buzzfeed, the Gateway Pundit, and Zero Hedge reported this stunning DOJ press release at midnight on election day, the busiest media day of the year. Strangely, the Zero Hedge story is no longer online but the way-back machine finds it. The Judge also withheld this exculpatory portion of Mueller’s report from my defense attorneys at trial.

I also note that the “proof” of Russian collusion with the Trump camp, constantly cited by the Twitter trolls, is always the assertion that Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort shared polling data with an associate Konstantine Kilimnik who they alleged was a Russian intelligence asset. It’s yet another Fugazi!

In fact, despite their heavily taxpayer-funded and media-fueled investigation, the only alleged evidence that both House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and de facto Special Counsel Andrew Weissmann constantly cite is this false allegation about Kilimnik. Schiff recycled this Chestnut only weeks ago on CNN.

There are two fundamental problems with this phony narrative. First is the substantial evidence that not only is Kilimnik not a Russian intelligence asset, but evidence shows that he was working extensively with US Intelligence. Kilimnik actually worked for US Senator John McCain prior to the 2016 Presidential Campaign.

Paul Manafort himself addressed this in his book, “Political Prisoner: Persecuted, Prosecuted, but Not Silenced” when he said, “…my associate Konstantin Kilimnik…. was not only not a Russian agent, but he was a US asset. He was so important to the US embassy in Kiev that he had a code name to protect him in cable traffic between Ukraine and Washington.” Manafort went on to say that “The same anonymous US government sources who pushed this false narrative had access to the State Department files that identified him as a valued asset. They knew he was not a spy.”

Independent journalist Matt Taibbi reported, “The FBI’s own declassified reports show Kilimnik met with the head of the Kiev embassy’s political section “at least biweekly” during his time working with Manafort and Yanukovitch, adding that he “displayed good knowledge and seemed to know what was going on,” and came across as “less slanted” than other sources, among many other things. This fits with what I was told by multiple former colleagues of Kilimnik’s, that staffers in the Kiev embassy valued his analyses above those of some Americans in Yanukovitch’s orbit. Taibbi also noted that Kilimnik was so valued as a source by the State Department that his name was redacted from classified cables to and from the U.S. embassy in Kiev.

The other major problem with this false claim of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign and that Manafort passed highly secret polling to this alleged Russian agent is the fact that Manafort had no poll numbers that were proprietary to the Trump campaign at the time both Democrats and Federal prosecutors claimed he had shared the data with Kilimnik.

Again Manafort wrote “The major misrepresentation by Weissman related to the “secret internal” polling data that I supposedly gave to Kilimnik. The fact that the campaign polling that I supposedly gave Kilimnik at the August 2 meeting was not even completed until August 8 was ignored. Also, ignored, was (Manfort Deputy Rick) Gates’s testimony in his proffers to the FBI that the information that he gave to Kilimnik was publicly available information.

The significance is that the campaign had no non-public polling data on August 2. Republican Pollster Tony Fabrizio, who was working for Trump had gone into the field in the battleground states on Aug 1 with the preliminary results not becoming available to me or Gates until Aug 8 and later.”

There was no Russian Collusion with the Trump campaign. No passing of poll numbers by Manafort nor in the release of the Wikileaks disclosures regarding Hillary and her campaign nor in the Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump, Jr. and others who met with a Russian Woman lawyer who was briefed before and after her meeting by her handlers at Fusion-GPS, the creators of the fabricated Steele Dossier. Trolls on X have bought this crap hook line and sinker. They should not bother leaving me hateful messages on X. I will only block them.