BOOK REVIEW
1\
I recently read The Faking of Russia-gate by Stephen Roh, the attorney and business partner of Joseph Mifsud.
Roh’s hypothesis is that Russia-gate is a phony scandal, concocted by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC.
1\
I recently read The Faking of Russia-gate by Stephen Roh, the attorney and business partner of Joseph Mifsud.
Roh’s hypothesis is that Russia-gate is a phony scandal, concocted by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC.
2\
As it turns out, we now know Hillary Clinton did indeed approve a proposal to smear Donald Trump with allegations of Russian collusion.
nypost.com/2020/10/06/spy…
As it turns out, we now know Hillary Clinton did indeed approve a proposal to smear Donald Trump with allegations of Russian collusion.
nypost.com/2020/10/06/spy…
3\
In his book, published over 2 years ago, Roh gives a version of how this conspiracy unfolded.
He admits that Joseph Mifsud was part of the Clinton network.
In his book, published over 2 years ago, Roh gives a version of how this conspiracy unfolded.
He admits that Joseph Mifsud was part of the Clinton network.
4\
He also claims the London Center of International Law Practice (LCILP), the institution where both PapaD and Mifsud were employed, was a front for Western intelligence agencies.
He also claims the London Center of International Law Practice (LCILP), the institution where both PapaD and Mifsud were employed, was a front for Western intelligence agencies.
5\
And what about Alexander Downer?
Roh repeats the same accusations about him that you’ve probably heard on Fox News or Dan Bongino’s podcast.
And what about Alexander Downer?
Roh repeats the same accusations about him that you’ve probably heard on Fox News or Dan Bongino’s podcast.
6\
Now you might be thinking: Roh’s theory sounds a lot like the “Push...Pull” theory (Mifsud pushed information about Russians possessing ‘dirt’ on HRC into PapaD and Downer pulled it out of him).
There is one key difference, however: Roh claims PapaD was part of the setup.
Now you might be thinking: Roh’s theory sounds a lot like the “Push...Pull” theory (Mifsud pushed information about Russians possessing ‘dirt’ on HRC into PapaD and Downer pulled it out of him).
There is one key difference, however: Roh claims PapaD was part of the setup.
7\
Roh goes into depth on LCILP. He makes the case that the organization was decidedly Pro-Clinton and anti-Trump.
Roh goes into depth on LCILP. He makes the case that the organization was decidedly Pro-Clinton and anti-Trump.
8\
The recently released Senate Russia report confirms that it was PapaD who reached out to LCILP to inquire about employment.
Why would PapaD want to be part of such an organization?
The recently released Senate Russia report confirms that it was PapaD who reached out to LCILP to inquire about employment.
Why would PapaD want to be part of such an organization?
9\
In interviews, PapaD makes it sound like he was a ping-pong ball passive batted from one strange encounter to the next. But surely he was more aware of what the deal was at LCILP than he’s letting on. He’s not stupid.
What did he do? Did he work for free?
In interviews, PapaD makes it sound like he was a ping-pong ball passive batted from one strange encounter to the next. But surely he was more aware of what the deal was at LCILP than he’s letting on. He’s not stupid.
What did he do? Did he work for free?
10\
Both Mifsud and Ivan Timofeev tell Roh that it was PapaD who was determined to set up a meeting between Trump and Putin. Not them. And definitely not the Russian government.
Both Mifsud and Ivan Timofeev tell Roh that it was PapaD who was determined to set up a meeting between Trump and Putin. Not them. And definitely not the Russian government.
11\
As I pointed out in a previous thread, Chicago is a long way from Rome, much farther away than Malta (Mifsud’s home country) is from Rome.
On the surface, it appears PapaD went out of his way to meet Mifsud.
As I pointed out in a previous thread, Chicago is a long way from Rome, much farther away than Malta (Mifsud’s home country) is from Rome.
On the surface, it appears PapaD went out of his way to meet Mifsud.
https://twitter.com/SeekerOTL/status/1026497579729793024
12\
And according to Mifsud, when they first met it was PapaD who wanted help making Russian contacts.
And according to Mifsud, when they first met it was PapaD who wanted help making Russian contacts.
13\
There are several claims in Roh’s book that haven’t held up over time.
For instance, in his discussion of PapaD and Sergei Millian, Roh assumes Millian is a source for the dossier. We now know that’s not correct.
There are several claims in Roh’s book that haven’t held up over time.
For instance, in his discussion of PapaD and Sergei Millian, Roh assumes Millian is a source for the dossier. We now know that’s not correct.
14\
Their communication lasted as late as Oct 2016 and was rather substantial.
Their communication lasted as late as Oct 2016 and was rather substantial.
15\
Personally, at this point in time, I don’t believe PapaD was a DNC/HRC plant.
HOWEVER, my reasons for not believing would require another thread for me to fully explain. His documented behavior, especially in in the early months of the campaign,...
Personally, at this point in time, I don’t believe PapaD was a DNC/HRC plant.
HOWEVER, my reasons for not believing would require another thread for me to fully explain. His documented behavior, especially in in the early months of the campaign,...
16\
...is so peculiar and damning that the onus is on me to give an alternative explanation.
...is so peculiar and damning that the onus is on me to give an alternative explanation.
17\
And for those who believe the “Push...Pull” theory and that PapaD was the target of a conspiracy, I believe you still need to explain why PapaD was so relentless in his desire to set up a meeting between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
And for those who believe the “Push...Pull” theory and that PapaD was the target of a conspiracy, I believe you still need to explain why PapaD was so relentless in his desire to set up a meeting between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
18\
We have quite a bit of evidence now on PapaD’s activities (charging documents, the Mueller report, IG report, Senate report, CHS transcripts, his book and interviews, etc) that ‘he was simply ambitious’ just isn’t a sufficient answer.
We have quite a bit of evidence now on PapaD’s activities (charging documents, the Mueller report, IG report, Senate report, CHS transcripts, his book and interviews, etc) that ‘he was simply ambitious’ just isn’t a sufficient answer.
19\
Yes, he’s ambitious. But why was the advisor whose specialty is East Mediterranean energy policy so determined to set up a meeting with Russians?
Yes, he’s ambitious. But why was the advisor whose specialty is East Mediterranean energy policy so determined to set up a meeting with Russians?
20\
We only focus on Timofeev and “Putin’s niece,” but it wasn’t just them. In this overlooked footnote from the Mueller report, PapaD connected with other Russians over LinkedIn.
h/t @stacykarma1
We only focus on Timofeev and “Putin’s niece,” but it wasn’t just them. In this overlooked footnote from the Mueller report, PapaD connected with other Russians over LinkedIn.
h/t @stacykarma1
21\
For his part, PapaD blames Trump campaign officials, in particular Jeff Sessions and Sam Clovis.
They encouraged contacts with Russians, he claims.
For his part, PapaD blames Trump campaign officials, in particular Jeff Sessions and Sam Clovis.
They encouraged contacts with Russians, he claims.
22\
However, there are problems with that defense.
First, other members of the campaign don’t support PapaD’s version.
businessinsider.com/jd-gordon-sess…
However, there are problems with that defense.
First, other members of the campaign don’t support PapaD’s version.
businessinsider.com/jd-gordon-sess…
23\
It also doesn’t help that GP testified before a congressional testimony that he lied to campaign officials.
It also doesn’t help that GP testified before a congressional testimony that he lied to campaign officials.
24\
There are also documented instances where PapaD was told by someone on the campaign not to pursue any links to Russia and he did it anyway.
There are also documented instances where PapaD was told by someone on the campaign not to pursue any links to Russia and he did it anyway.
25\
Yes, Clovis could have been more direct with PapaD. But maybe he thought PapaD could take a hint. Clovis clearly underestimated PapaD’s persistence.
PapaD was “on a mission” to set up a meeting between Trump and Putin, according to Roh.
Yes, Clovis could have been more direct with PapaD. But maybe he thought PapaD could take a hint. Clovis clearly underestimated PapaD’s persistence.
PapaD was “on a mission” to set up a meeting between Trump and Putin, according to Roh.
26\
Roh is one of the earliest commentators to point out that there is no evidence that PapaD told anyone that the Russians had thousands of HRC’s emails prior to his May 2017 FBI interview.
Roh is one of the earliest commentators to point out that there is no evidence that PapaD told anyone that the Russians had thousands of HRC’s emails prior to his May 2017 FBI interview.
27\
Roh weaves an elaborate conspiracy theory of his own that involves financier Jeffrey Leeds, DNC/HRC and PapaD. It’s too complicated to explain here, but the main takeaway is that PapaD was a plant who failed to connect the Trump campaign and Russia.
Roh weaves an elaborate conspiracy theory of his own that involves financier Jeffrey Leeds, DNC/HRC and PapaD. It’s too complicated to explain here, but the main takeaway is that PapaD was a plant who failed to connect the Trump campaign and Russia.
28\
Again, I’m not sold. However, it is more plausible than theories that rely on PapaD blindly stumbling from one shady encounter to the next.
So overall it was a surprisingly good book. As one of the earliest books written on Spygate it holds up rather well.
END
Again, I’m not sold. However, it is more plausible than theories that rely on PapaD blindly stumbling from one shady encounter to the next.
So overall it was a surprisingly good book. As one of the earliest books written on Spygate it holds up rather well.
END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
