Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
MUELLER defends charges against Russian firm.
U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller pushed back against a company owned by Yevgeny Prigozhin, a Russian oligarch known as “Putin’s chef,” telling a federal judge that the charges filed against the firm — conspiracy to defraud the U.S. — aren’t dependent on proving that election interference is a crime.
The special counsel’s office wrote in a filing that prosecutors need to show only that the company, Concord Management and Consulting, and its alleged co-conspirators agreed to engage in conduct that violated their duties to register as foreign agents and report campaign expenditures. “The government is not required to prove that the conspirators actually violated” federal election and campaign finance laws, prosecutors wrote.
The February charges described a wide range of coordinated conduct designed to influence voters’ attitudes toward the U.S. presidential candidates.
“The indictment alleges that a purpose of these manifold acts of deception was to frustrate the lawful government functions of the United States,” prosecutors wrote. “Those allegations are sufficient to support the charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States regardless of whether the defendants agreed to engage in conduct that violated” the election and campaign finance laws.
Concord and 13 Russian nationals, including Prigozhin, were charged in February with conspiracy to defraud the U.S. by mounting social media campaigns in 2016 meant to help the Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, and hurt his competitor, Hillary Clinton, a Democrat. The indictment also included charges of wire fraud and identity theft, as prosecutors say the Russians adopted American identities as part of their effort to influence the election.
Neither Prigozhin nor the other Russian nationals have responded to the charges, but Concord Management has fought back. The company’s lawyer, Eric Dubelier of Reed Smith, has argued that Concord’s failure to register as a foreign agent or report campaign-related expenditures doesn’t constitute a crime.
Last week, the federal judge overseeing the case asked Mueller’s team to respond to that claim.
The government’s response was filed by Jonathan Kravis of the U.S. attorney’s office in the District of Columbia in conjunction with the special counsel’s office, represented by Michael Dreeben and Jeannie Rhee.
Separately, White House National Security Adviser John Bolton told his Russian counterpart that his country’s interference in the 2016 presidential election didn’t affect the outcome but has nonetheless damaged relations with the U.S.
“The point I made to Russian colleagues today was that I didn’t think, whatever they had done in terms of meddling in the 2016 election, that they had any effect on it,” Bolton told Echo Moskvy, according to a transcript provided by the U.S. Embassy. “But what they have had an effect in the United States is to sow enormous distrust of Russia, and it’s a major obstacle to achieving agreement on issues where our national interest may converge.”
Members of Congress from both parties have pressed the administration to impose tougher sanctions on Russia to punish it for election meddling.
The U.S. last week charged a Russian woman with conspiring to interfere with the current 2018 midterm congressional elections along with the 2016 election. U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies have warned of ongoing efforts by Russia, along with other foreign governments, to interfere in the 2018 midterm and 2020 presidential elections.