Key figure that Mueller report linked to Russia was a State Department intel
source

By John Solomon, opinion contributor 

In a key finding of the  <https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf>
Mueller report,
<https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/23/us/politics/konstantin-kilimnik-russia.h
tml> Ukrainian businessman  <https://thehill.com/people/konstantin-kilimnik>
Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Trump campaign chairman
<https://thehill.com/people/paul-manafort> Paul Manafort, is tied to Russian
intelligence.

But hundreds of pages of government documents — which special counsel
<https://thehill.com/people/robert-mueller> 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.

What it doesn’t state is that Kilimnik was a “sensitive” intelligence source
for State going back to at least 2013 while he was still working for
Manafort, according to FBI and State Department memos I reviewed.

Kilimnik was not just any run-of-the-mill source, either.

He interacted with the chief political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev,
sometimes meeting several times a week to provide information on the Ukraine
government. He relayed messages back to Ukraine’s leaders and delivered
written reports to U.S. officials via emails that stretched on for thousands
of words, the memos show.

The FBI knew all of this, well before the Mueller investigation concluded.

Alan Purcell, the chief political officer at the Kiev embassy from 2014 to
2017, told FBI agents that State officials, including senior embassy
officials Alexander Kasanof and Eric Schultz, deemed Kilimnik to be such a
valuable asset that they kept his name out of cables for fear he would be
compromised by leaks to WikiLeaks.

“Purcell described what he considered an unusual level of discretion that
was taken with handling Kilimnik,” states one FBI interview report that I
reviewed. “Normally the head of the political section would not handle
sources, but Kasanof informed Purcell that KILIMNIK was a sensitive source.”

Purcell told the FBI that Kilimnik provided “detailed information about OB
(Ukraine’s opposition bloc) inner workings” that sometimes was so valuable
it was forwarded immediately to the ambassador. Purcell learned that other
Western governments relied on Kilimnik as a source, too.

“One time, in a meeting with the Italian embassy, Purcell heard the Italian
ambassador echo a talking point that was strikingly familiar to the point
Kilimnik had shared with Purcell,” the FBI report states.

Kasanof, who preceded Purcell as the U.S. Embassy political officer, told
the FBI he knew Kilimnik worked for Manafort’s lobbying firm and
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/25/ukraine-ex-president-viktor-y
anukovych-found-guilty-of-treason> the administration of former Ukrainian
President Viktor Yanukovych, whose Party of Regions hired Manafort’s firm.

Kasanof described Kilimnik as one of the few reliable insiders the U.S.
Embassy had informing on Yanukovych. Kilimnik began his relationship as an
informant with the U.S. deputy chief of mission in 2012–13, before being
handed off to the embassy’s political office, the records suggest.

“Kilimnik was one of the only people within the administration who was
willing to talk to USEMB,” referring to the U.S. Embassy, and he “provided
information about the inner workings of Yanukovych’s administration,”
Kasanof told the FBI agents.

“Kasanof met with Kilimnik at least bi-weekly and occasionally multiple
times in the same week,” always outside the embassy to avoid detection, the
FBI wrote. “Kasanof allowed Kilimnik to take the lead on operational
security” for their meetings.

State officials told the FBI that although Kilimnik had Ukrainian and
Russian residences, he did not appear to hold any allegiance to Moscow and
was critical of Russia’s
<https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/russia-s-crimea-invasion-was-good-put
in-five-years-later-ncna984431> invasion of the Crimean territory of
Ukraine.

“Most sources of information in Ukraine were slanted in one direction or
another,” Kasanof told agents. “Kilimnik came across as less slanted than
others.”

“Kilimnik was flabbergasted at the Russian invasion of Crimea,” the FBI
added, summarizing Kasanof’s interview with agents.

Three sources with direct knowledge of the inner workings of Mueller’s
office confirmed to me that the special prosecutor’s team had all of the FBI
interviews with State officials, as well as Kilimnik’s intelligence reports
to the U.S. Embassy, well before they portrayed him as a Russian sympathizer
tied to Moscow intelligence or
<https://time.com/5306563/robert-mueller-indicts-konstantin-kilimnik-and-hit
s-paul-manafort-with-another-charge/> charged Kilimnik with participating
with Manafort in a scheme to obstruct the Russia investigation.

Kasanof’s and Purcell’s interviews are corroborated by scores of State
Department emails I reviewed that contain regular intelligence from Kilimnik
on happenings inside the Yanukovych administration, the Crimea conflict and
Ukrainian and Russian politics. For example, the memos show Kilimnik
provided real-time intelligence on everything from whose star in the
administration was rising or falling to efforts at stuffing ballot boxes in
Ukrainian elections.

Those emails raise further doubt about the Mueller report’s portrayal of
Kilimnik as a Russian agent. They show Kilimnik was allowed to visit the
United States twice in 2016 to meet with State officials, a clear sign he
wasn’t flagged in visa databases as a foreign intelligence threat.

The emails also show how misleading, by omission, the Mueller report’s
public portrayal of Kilimnik turns out to be.

For instance, the report makes a big deal about
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-manaforts-2016-meeting-with-a-r
ussian-employee-at-new-york-cigar-club-goes-to-the-heart-of-muellers-probe/2
019/02/12/655f84dc-2d67-11e9-8ad3-9a5b113ecd3c_story.html?utm_term=.396aa9ea
b646> Kilimnik’s meeting with Manafort in August 2016 at the Trump Tower in
New York.

By that time, Manafort had served as Trump’s campaign chairman for several
months but was
<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/20/us/politics/paul-manafort-resigns-donald
-trump.html> about to resign because of a growing controversy about the
millions of dollars Manafort accepted as a foreign lobbyist for Yanukovych’s
party.

Specifically, the Mueller report flagged Kilimnik’s delivery of a peace plan
to the Trump campaign for settling the two-year-old Crimea conflict between
Russia and Ukraine.

“Kilimnik requested the meeting to deliver in person a peace plan for
Ukraine that Manafort acknowledged to the Special Counsel’s Office was a
‘backdoor’ way for Russia to control part of eastern Ukraine,” the Mueller
report stated.

But State emails showed Kilimnik first delivered a version of his peace plan
in May 2016 to the Obama administration during a visit to Washington.
Kasanof, his former handler at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, had been
promoted to a top policy position at State, and the two met for dinner on
May 5, 2016.

The day after the dinner, Kilimnik sent an email to Kasanof’s official State
email address recounting the peace plan they had discussed the night before.

Russia wanted “a quick settlement” to get “Ukraine out of the way and get
rid of sanctions and move to economic stuff they are interested in,”
Kilimnik wrote Kasanof. The email offered eight bullet points for the peace
plan — starting with a ceasefire, a law creating economic recovery zones to
rebuild war-torn Ukrainian regions, and a “presidential decree on amnesty”
for anyone involved in the conflict on both sides.

Kilimnik also provided a valuable piece of intelligence, stating that the
old Yanukovych political party aligned with Russia was dead. “Party of
Regions cannot be reincarnated. It is over,” he wrote, deriding as “stupid”
a Russian-backed politician who wanted to restart the party.

Kasanof replied the next day that, although he was skeptical of some of the
intelligence on Russian intentions, it was “very important for us to know.”

He thanked Kilimnik for the detailed plan and added, “I passed the info to
my bosses, who are chewing it over.” Kasanof told the FBI that he believed
he sent Kilimnik’s peace plan to two senior State officials, including
Victoria Nuland, President Obama’s assistant secretary of State for European
and Eurasian affairs.

So Kilimnik’s delivery of the peace plan to the Trump campaign in August
2016 was flagged by Mueller as potentially nefarious, but its earlier
delivery to the Obama administration wasn’t mentioned. That’s what many in
the intelligence world might call “deception by omission.”

Lest you wonder, the documents I reviewed included evidence that Kasanof’s
interview with the FBI and Kilimnik’s emails to State about the peace plan
were in Mueller’s possession by early 2018, more than a year before the
final report.

Officials for the State Department, the FBI, the Justice Department and
Mueller’s office did not respond to requests for comment. Kilimnik did not
respond to an email seeking comment but, in an email
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/longtime-manafort-associate-konstan
tin-kilimnik-rejects-his-depiction-in-mueller-report/2019/04/19/af9221ce-62b
c-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.48007f846012> last month to
The Washington Post, he slammed the Mueller report’s “made-up narrative”
about him. “I have no ties to Russian or, for that matter, any intelligence
operation,” he wrote.

Kilimnik holds Ukrainian and Russian citizenship, served in the Soviet
military, attended a prestigious Russian language academy and had contacts
with Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. So it is likely he had contacts over
the years with Russian intelligence figures. There also is evidence Kilimnik
left the U.S.-funded International Republican Institute (IRI) in 2005
because of concerns about his past connections to Russia, though at least
one IRI witness disputed that evidence to the FBI, the memos show.

Yet, omitting his extensive, trusted assistance to the State Department
seems inexplicable.

If Mueller’s team can cast such a misleading portrayal of Kilimnik, however,
it begs the question of what else might be incorrect or omitted in the
report.

Attorney General  <https://thehill.com/people/william-barr> William Barr has
said some of the Mueller report’s legal reasoning conflicts with Justice
Department policies. And former Trump attorney John Dowd made a compelling
case that Mueller’s report wrongly portrayed a phone message he left for a
witness.

A few more such errors and omissions, and Americans may begin to wonder if
the Mueller report is worth the paper on which it was printed.

 <https://thehill.com/person/john-solomon> John Solomon is an award-winning
investigative journalist whose work over the years has exposed U.S. and FBI
intelligence failures before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal scientists’
misuse of foster children and veterans in drug experiments, and numerous
cases of political corruption. He serves as an investigative columnist and
executive vice president for video at The Hill. Follow him on Twitter
<https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports> @jsolomonReports. 

EM         -> { Trump for 2020 }

On the 49th Parallel          

                 Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja and Dr. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda is in
anarchy"
                    Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni, Ssabassajja na Dk. Kiiza Besigye, Uganda ni
katika machafuko" 

 

_______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet

UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/

All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including 
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------

Reply via email to