The Mueller report is full of lies and half-truths. What’s important isn’t so much what they wrote but what they left out. Take this for an example. The Mueller report described Ukrainian businessman Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Paul Manafort was a Russian asset. Why?
After all, Robert Mueller and his henchmen knew that Kilimnik worked for the State Department. Yes, our State Department. So Mueller wrote in his report that he was a Russian asset and never mentioned that he worked for our government.
This is the type of exculpatory evidence which is absent all through the report, which allows Democrats to distort what Mueller actually did find.
“In a key finding of the Mueller report, Ukrainian businessman Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, is tied to Russian intelligence,” writes John Solomon. Solomon adds:
But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel Robert Mueller possessed since 2018 — describe Kilimnik as a “sensitive” intelligence sourcefor 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.
So during the Obama administration — let me repeat that for the CNN-impaired: the Obama administration — this same Konstantin Kilimnik worked with the Obama State Department and “delivered written reports to U.S. officials via emails that stretched on for thousands of words