by Margot Cleveland
The U.S. Department of Defense and private individuals pumping the Alfa Bank hoax also assisted former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Donald Trump for supposed collusion with Russia, newly discovered documents suggest.
The Georgia Tech researchers embroiled in the Alfa Bank hoax prepared white papers for the U.S. Department of Defense about the Democratic National Committee hack and created a “Mueller List” on the Russian intelligence agency hackers, the newly obtained documents indicate. The white papers were prepared for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a section of the U.S. Department of Defense.
A recent dump of documents from Georgia Tech reveals that explosive detail and several other facts connected to the continuing special counsel investigation into Spygate. Here’s a rundown.
White Papers for the U.S. Department of Defense
Last month, The Federalist first reported that Special Counsel John Durham’s team asked lead Georgia Tech researcher Manos Antonakakis: “‘Do you believe that DARPA should be instructing you to investigate the origins of a hacker (Guccifer_2.0) that hacked a political entity (DNC)?’” Antonakakis responded that that was a question for the DARPA director, an implied acknowledgment that yes, DARPA had asked him to investigate the hack.
In response, DARPA’s chief of communications denied any involvement “in efforts to attribute the DNC hack.” “Dr. Antonakakis worked on DARPA’s Enhanced Attribution program, which did not involve analysis of the DNC hack,” DARPA spokesman Jared Adams told the Washington Examiner. Adams further told the Washington Examiner that “DARPA was not involved in efforts to attribute the Guccifer 2.0 persona, nor any involvement in efforts to attribute the origin of leaked emails provided to Wikileaks.”
But now an email obtained by The Federalist indicates Georgia Tech researchers drafted a series of white papers for DARPA, including on the “DNC attack attribution,” and on what they called a “Mueller List” of “domains and indicators related” to DNC hackers.
The email dated July 23, 2021 followed Durham dropping a second subpoena on Georgia Tech for more documents related to its investigation of the Alfa Bank hoax and other related issues. (More on that subpoena below). In that email, a lawyer representing David Dagon, the second Georgia Tech researcher involved in the Alfa Bank hoax who also worked on the DARPA Enhanced Attribution program, shared a list of “documents/data sources” Dagon believed would be responsive to the subpoena of Georgia Tech documents.
Listed under the heading of “DARPA whitepapers” were four documents, including “Whitepaper on DNC attack attribution”; Analysis of attacks of EOP (Executive Office of the President) networks”; “Whitepaper for DOJ on APT-29 related hackers, crypto coin transactions, and analysis that includes Yota-related domains”; and “‘Mueller List’—list of domains and indicator related to APT-28.”
Of these DARPA whitepapers, the first and fourth both relate to the DNC hack, with the final paper also connecting to the Mueller investigation. APT-28 is the more formal name for the Russian intelligence group of hackers known colloquially as Fancy Bear. As part of his investigation, Mueller charged 12 Russian intelligence agents allegedly working as Fancy Bear with crimes related to the DNC hack.
This email represents the latest evidence suggesting Georgia Tech and DARPA assisted in the DNC hack investigation and Mueller’s investigation, notwithstanding DARPA’s strident denials.
Yota-Related Domains
The above email raises a second question worth probing, namely whether tech executive Rodney Joffe used the whitepaper Georgia Tech researchers prepared for DARPA on “Yota-related domains” in his continued attempt to frame Trump as colluding with Russia.
As I explained earlier this week, in February 2017, Michael Sussmann, allegedly on behalf of Joffe, presented the CIA four files of data purporting to show the use of the Russian-made Yotaphone near Trump. The Yotaphone supposedly traveled with Trump to Michigan and later to the Executive Office of the President during the presidential transition period.
The Yotaphone hoax, as I detailed, represents a huge scandal because it involved both the exploitation of sensitive data related to the EOP and the apparent physical (or electronic) surveillance of Trump. Further, the data provided to the CIA was deceptive by omission and peddled to trigger a CIA investigation of the sitting president of the United States of America.
But the above email now adds to the scandal the possibility that the DARPA-funded research on the Yota domains was shared with Joffe or other outsiders, who then used that intel to track the Russian-based Yotaphones to create the conspiracy theory later peddled to the CIA. This potential scenario needs further investigation.
Georgia Tech Gave Mueller a Large File of Trump-Related Material That Went Missing
That the Georgia Tech researchers worked with Mueller’s investigation into Trump also seems clear from an exchange between lead prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis and the Georgia Attorney General’s Office, which represented Georgia Tech in its response to the subpoena. In that email thread, the attorney representing Georgia Tech noted that DeFilippis had “indicated that there was a ‘fairly large file of Trump related materials’ that had been assembled for production to the office of Special Counsel Robert [Mueller] or the DOJ.”
“We are unable to locate such a file,” the email continued, even though “Dr. Antonakakis has searched his server for such a file and did not find anything meeting that description.”
Whether the “fairly large file of Trump related materials” was ever found is unknown.
Durham Is Digging Far and Wide
The most recent Georgia Tech documents also reveal the breadth and scope of the potential conspiracies Durham is investigating, with a subpoena from July 2021 to Georgia Tech and its related organization seeking documents related to “a purported secret communications channel between the Trump Organization, Spectrum Health, and the Russian Bank Alfa Bank,” as well as material related to “the purported presence or use of Russian-made Yotaphones by or in the vicinity of Donald Trump or individuals affiliated with Donald Trump.”
Significantly, the subpoena also sought “all documents, records, and information” related to the Alfa Bank and Yotaphone research, including work conducted under or pursuant to contracts with DARPA.
The Georgia Tech documents also reveal that this subpoena is the second served on the university by the special counsel’s office, with the first issued in fall 2020, according to another email. (One wonders what the original subpoena sought and what put the investigators onto the Alfa Bank and Yotaphone trail.) Emails released also indicate that the special counsel’s office subpoenaed documents from Dagon.
Immunity for Dagon
Emails included in the Right-to-Know release from Georgia Tech also provide more texture to the Durham case against Sussmann, who is currently awaiting trial next month on a charge that he lied to the now-former FBI General Counsel James Baker in providing Baker data and white papers purporting to establish the Trump-Alfa Bank secret communication network.
[the_ad id=”157875″]
Last Friday, in response to Sussmann’s claim that Durham should be required to provide Joffe immunity so the tech executive would testify on Susssmann’s behalf, the special counsel noted that to date it had only immunized one witness—Dagon. The special counsel noted that it granted Dagon immunity on July 28, 2021, “because, among other reasons, at least five other witnesses who conducted work relating to the [Alfa Bank] allegations invoked (or indicated their intent to invoke) their right against self-incrimination.”
The documents reviewed by The Federalist show that, as of July 26, 2021, Dagon was “en route to DC for his meeting with the Special Counsel and testimony with the Grand Jury,” meaning the immunity grant came late in the day for Dagon. Another email from Dagon’s attorney to Georgia Tech noted that “David Dagon was given full statutory immunity by the Special Counsel in its investigation.”
“He has been cooperating and working with the Special Counsel’s team and testified before the Grand Jury on three days,” Dagon’s attorney Jody Westby told the Georgia Tech legal team, in the context of requesting payment from the university for the legal services Westby and her team performed on behalf of Dagon.
That Dagon testified for three days before the grand jury suggests the special counsel’s team had quite a few questions to ask the cyber researcher. From another email, it seems likely that, whatever Dagon said, he convinced the special counsel’s office that Antonakakis was not involved in any criminal activity. On July 29, 2021, Antonakakis’ attorney Mark Schamel emailed DeFilippis, noting that now that the special counsel has “appropriately categorized Dr. Antonakakis as a witness,” they would happily discuss a follow-up meeting with Durham’s team.
Georgia Tech Entered a Joint Defense Agreement—Until It Didn’t
Another fascinating detail contained in the Georgia Tech dump concerned the apparent joint defense agreement the individuals ensnared in the Alfa Bank hoax initially entered into with each other. A “joint-defense agreement” is where parties agree to exchange confidential information and work together, typically, but not always, in relation to a criminal investigation. When parties have entered a joint-defense agreement, they may share information and communications with each other, without the communications losing the protection of attorney-client privilege.
After the special counsel dropped its second subpoena on Georgia Tech, Dagon’s attorney emailed a lawyer at Georgia Tech, noting that Dagon would not be responding to the subpoena served on Georgia Tech—that was solely Georgia Tech’s responsibility. Dagon’s attorney then added: “We have never seen the first subpoena Georgia Tech produced or your production; nor have we seen this second subpoena. Although Georgia Tech agreed to an informal joint defense agreement, after we produced our subpoena and relevant documents, Georgia Tech pulled back from that and refused to share any information, . . . We are also not privy to your discussions with the Special Counsel office.”
As a reminder, the Meuller Report COMPLETELY exonerated Trump of everything, collusion and obstruction alike.
To save face the corrupt deep state and Democrats continue to lie and say Trump somehow worked with Russia to “influence” (whatever that means) the 2016 election.
They are fools, and Trump is innocent of this treasonous hoax.
NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO TIES TO RUSSIA WHATSOEVER.
TOTAL EXONORATION.
An excellent point given what we are now learning from Durban’s investigation. The clinton campaign and the dnc were up to their ears in colluding to frame President Trump for something he never did. Then as if that was not sufficient following the debacle of the mueller investigation, the democrats created a fake scenario with a phone call to the newly elected President of Ukraine.
The impeachment never had any merits and should be expunged during the Congress of 2023 under Republican control.
That would be news to Mueller. From this article:
Doubt very much if mueller is cognizant enough to even know what you are saying. It is well known mueller suffers from dementia such that he may not even know who he is. Is he still alive?
“Doubt very much.”
“May not.”
That’s a really solid case you’re building there!
Using the usual Leftist words.
The Russia hoax went from exonerated Trump of collusion to Russia “influenced” the election or something.
Very weak language indeed, and meant to mislead those who don’t think critically.
You, perhaps? You may not…and I doubt very much that you do.
Are you saying that these words, then, are inadequate? Then yes, I agree.
Are you saying that they’re adequate? Then they’re good enough for the Left, as well as the Right.
As is often the case, you’ve deftly snarked yourself into a corner.
Rather than win an argument, you deflect with weak, uncommitted posturing and zero substance.
There’s no corner to get stuck in, my friend. That would require some kind of definition, which you smartly resist lest you actually have a real position to defend knowing you can’t.
What is the significance of that, in your mind?….rofl.
Clownshow coming from the left on this blog lately
So are all appointed government employees now the enemy, if they don’t belong to one’s preferred party?
Clownshow
That’s easier than dealing with your own statements honestly, I guess.
What is the significance of that, in your mind?
Well, it suggests that you’re unable to support your own ideas with facts. You find it easier to call names and deflect with ridicule that to stand up for what you say you believe.
You’re great at putting shit out there, but not so great at backing it up.
That’s the significance. Thanks for asking.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to establish here. Could you please give a little more detail?
What is the significance of the detail that you think that word means, Curt?
Can you explain what you think you might have said and what that means or doesn’t mean in regards to what you think you are establishing here?
Careful, Michael. You’re “Quantico” is showing.
I don’t know what that means.
No, but that is certainly the precedent set by you and Democrats for at least two decades.
Nothing was stopping congress from charging the President, except zero evidence. We saw what they considered enough for impeachment. Pretty damn solid exoneration.
Congress did charge Trump. That’s what impeachment was all about.
Impeachment does not follow Constitutional Law. They can do it without evidence, as we saw.
The process is laid out in the Constitution, so it pretty much follows the Constitution by definition.
But is not Constitutional Law.
Read more.
It’s based on opinions of Congress people rather than a true burden of proof in front of a jury of peers.
The “impeachment” was a star chamber and against everything we stand for as a nation.
Putin does things like that.
Not us.
Do you want impeachment amended out of the Constitution?
It’s the Constitution. Everything in the Constitution is constitutional, because it’s, you know, in the Constitution.
Con Law classes begin with the Constitution.
I’m glad I could clear that up for you.
Absolving of charges is what exonerate means, whether Mueller understands/says that or not.
The Democrats and deep state have done a good job of destroying the law with using public opinion and “we didn’t prove he DIDN’T do something wrong we can find or invent later…”
Basic ignorance of our Law and Constitution is real plague in this country.
Innocent until proven guilty, not “we’re threatened by Trump because he’s not one of us, so we’ll find SOMETHING to charge him with…eventually.”
That’s how Putin speaks and acts, by the way.
A tyrant.
Thanks for bringing your vast legal experience to the discussion, but I’ll listen to what the guy who helmed the process has to say about the conclusion it draws.
No. Words matter, and he was appointed, not elected.
Absolving of charges is what exonerate means, whether Mueller understands/says that or not.
We don’t pick and choose meanings just to support our political fantasies, as you do.
Trump was and is exonerated of any Russia Collusion or connection with…um…they can’t say anymore….something nebulously meant to make idiots think Russia rigged the 2016 election…or something.
Anything to defend the system that was installing HRC.
Meanwhile, Biden’s own provable sins continue to be covered up by the same people inventing Russia collusion.
That’s tyranny.
What is the significance of that, in your mind?
Well, appointed means he represents those who appointed him to accomplish that scope of work for which he was appointed. Elected means he would represent the body who elected him. Mueller just hired democrats and did whatever they told him to do!
So do Trump-appointed judges just do whatever he tells them to do? If that’s the case, maybe they should be removed from office. They can’t serve two masters—Trump and the Constitution.
No.
Trump applauded and encouraged Mueller to investigate. He had nothing to hide…as the facts have been laid out.
The investigation was presented as a coming proof of election fraud with a stolen 2016 election.
It was propaganda, and poisoned those Americans already given to Party loyalty over their obligation, as Americans, to objective truth.
Now we have a shady election, and NO investigation.
It’s was coup, pure and simple. The move keep the Russia hoax alive with zero proof and the new word “influenced” to label a hundred thousand dollars in facebook ads (Mark Zuckerberg paid $400 million to illegally sway the election in 2020) is what it appears to be: lies.
What does all of that have to do with Trump-appointed judges?
The article we’re posting at:
https://floppingaces.net/most-wanted/docs-spygate-researchers-did-work-for-former-special-counsel-robert-mueller/#comment-1139916
Try to keep up, dipshit.
If you weren’t responding to my question, why did you hit “Reply” to my comment and then begin with “No”?
You:
Me:
Do you not get direct answers, in education, and instead need things that imply rather than direct, to protect the weaknesses of the source from losing their jobs for actually meaning what they say?
Seems so.
What does all your blather have to do with the topic at hand, or the dumb comment you made about Trump-appointed judges doing whatever he wants?
That makes no sense as a sentence in the English language. With the best intentions on Earth I can’t figure out what you’re asking. You’re trying to be too elliptical, perhaps, or trying to make one sentence do the work of two or three.
The argument was made up above that Mueller lacked credibility because he was appointed, and that he would only do the bidding of the person who appointed him. I wanted to know whether that standard held true for all appointees or solely for those who say and do things with which the Right disagrees.
That’s why you are a teacher for children rather than an adult practitioner, like me. When you can’t argue, you edit. It’s pathetic and pathological.
No one said that. You’re being intentionally daft…or perhaps haplessly?
Your point was a juvenile attempt at rhetoric, and a very sad one.
The point is that Mueller was tasked with investigating if Trump colluded with Russia based on criminally manufactured documents and illegal grounds. His findings said “no,” so any of his conjecture beyond that point, influenced by partisan pressures to at least leave the door open because the deep state and Democrats now looked like fools, is what is beyond his scope and not to be listened to.
Your moronic deflection into “I wanted to know whether that standard held true for all appointees or solely for those who say and do things with which the Right disagrees.” is stupid. F*cking stupid, and a blatant disregard for the matter at hand.
Are you being trained to argue like a 13-year-old? Or are those kids the only people you talk to, most of the time?
Interesting. I regularly need to make sense of nearly-incomprehensible student writing on the way toward teaching them to write. I can say with all honesty that I haven’t received anything this whole year that was as incomprehensible as that sentence. Congratulations, I guess…?
Of what, precisely are you an adult practitioner?
Incorrect:
It’s a fair question, based on what Randy posted.
If it pisses you off so much, why don’t you just ignore it? It wasn’t aimed at you. I wanted to hear more from Randy, since he was the one who wrote it.
Then the rest of all of that was just spewage. Thanks for the clarification!
What is the significance of the significance of that, in your mind?
Ah, another person who is seemingly unfamiliar with the idea of asking questions in order to more fully understand the point that someone is trying to make.
A lot of you guys here make seemingly batshit assertions or, like kitt, spew an unintelligible word salad and unrelated facts in response to disagreement with your ideas. Asking you to explain or to tell me more or to rephrase what you’ve said is what grownups do when they’re communicating with each other. It’s possible that your ideas would make sense if approached from slightly different direction.
You’re being an infant when you do that.
You haven’t proven or defended ONE of your media-provided beliefs, instead sinking into a kind of middle-school douchebag false-dialect that reveals you have nothing to say beyond “The Leftist news said it’s true…so just shut up.”
No. I’m an adult who remains surprised at the idea that you are unwilling to clarify or expand upon what you say here.
An assertion like the Democrats concocted a scheme to make Trump appear to be a Russian asset and, though transparently false and ill-conceived, the DoJ, IC and leftist media pursued the lies enthusiastically for four years in an attempt to overthrow Trump in a coup? Actually, Sherlock, that’s precisely what happened and it has been proven.
What is batshit stupid is trying to drag a conversation off course with nit-picking and irrelevant assertions about “appointees”.
But, what would we expect from a committed leftist? An admission that the entire Democrat party is corrupt and anti-Constitution?
You’ll notice that I asked Randy that question because the thing he asserted was idiotic, just as you thought it was idiotic when I took what Randy said about appointees and applied it to Trump-appointed judges. I wanted to know more about why he had such a stupid idea.
For some reason, you came after me instead of the guy from your side who said the stupid thing in the first place.
‘TOTAL EXONORATION’ has become a Trump Cult mantra.
Even though Mueller explicitly said that Trump was not exonerated, and even though he explicitly referred his findings to Congress to deal with, which is the body he felt had the authority to do so.
It’s a dishonest way of “leaving the door open” to imply Trump still committed a crime, without any evidence or cause, so they can propagandize to people like you and greg…who will carry on the hoax even after it’s been debunked…because you are DESPERATE to match reality with the fantasyland you’ve been provided.
Mueller’s job was not to exonerate Trump. That is the cart before the horse. His job was to prove the commission of a crime. This he did not do. So, exoneration is a moot point.
Trump was not found to have done anything wrong, but to save face and to keep the totalitarian door open to inventing charges, of course you pawns are going to say “he’s not exonerated.”
Words matter.
“Trump is guilty and we don’t need to prove it!” has been the rote automatic verse repeated by drooling leftists since he won (actually WON with more legitimate votes) his election. Exoneration is unnecessary in the absence of any actual infraction.
4/22/22 – Jan. 6 revelations will ‘blow the roof off the House,’ Rep. Jamie Raskin says – The Jan. 6 committee plans to hold hearings in June and aims to have a report out about their investigation by the end of the summer or early fall, Raskin said.
The walls are closing in!!!!!
https://twitter.com/LastRunnerUp/status/1517699673418469376?t=D0V9D5jgxEZVhjvvYNHzUA&s=19
Bombshell after bombshell after bombshell, all of which are complete duds.
Already investigated and debunked by the FBI, no less. You whiny crybabies, wallowing in the utter failure of idiot Biden, are so PATHETIC in your grasping and weak, foolish, concocted straws. You should see yourselves. Sad.
Adam Schiff, April 22, 2022
Quoting Schiff doesn’t enhance your credibility. He seems to be describing himself.
Schiff is the textbook example of a totalitarian bureaucrat.
His actions are the opposite of the quote above.
What a slimeball.
04/22/22 – NYT reporters say they have more damaging tapes of Kevin McCarthy after releasing audio of him planning to ask Trump to resign over Jan. 6
That is good. McCarthy is a dirtbag non MAGA
People on the Right have to take every single centimeter of Trump’s metaphorical dick up their metaphorical butts, or they’re persona non grata. There is no room for questioning anything that Trump says or does. Not a cult at all!
Ah, the teacher’s mind goes straight to sex. Hmmmmmm.
Kind of explains why he’s been cheering on Disney’s assault on parental rights.
So you’re under the impression that teachers don’t have sex? Bless your heart. You probably think that we live in our classrooms, too, don’t you?
Do teachers have sex?
Are you gay?
Do you lament not doing Plan A, and living a shallow life following Plan B as a teacher?
Maybe I am. What of it?
I’m sorry that you think that teaching is a shallow profession. I hope that means you’re not a teacher.
Teaching was Plan A. What do you imagine it was instead?
At least we don’t have Obama’s actual one down our actual throats, as you leftists do.
You don’t know the definitions of either metaphorical or actual, apparently.
I understand you support a sick, demented cult of perversion. I understand you object to any exposure and counteraction to such institutionalized perversion.
They aren’t supposed to do so with their students, which has been revealed to be the case in numerous cases. Then, the lying about legislation that would address this threat to children in Florida reveals what the left’s priorities are. Pertaining to the subject at hand here, this is why the attempted coup was run against Trump; he is not of the establishment political class that excuses such perversion.
All evidence of his hanging out with Epstein notwithstanding?
You may want to take a real close look at who was hanging out with Epstein and in what capacity. It is easy to say “hanging” out with Epstein, what does that mean? Is telling someone to get lost hanging out? What is your definition of hanging out?
What is the damaging part?
“The Democrats don’t matter. The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.”
(Steve Bannon, convicted felon pardoned by Donald Trump, on how to render Truth irrelevant.)
The way to deal with the media is by showing the lies they tell. CNN is experiencing that already. If Musk gains Twitter, the World will see what has been censored! The world is changing while you sleep greggie!