Will Mueller Opt For ’Non-existent’ Intelligence?

By Ray McGovern

The phone was fully charged, and yet … Opps! During a radio interview on Sept. 6, Ray’s cellphone went mysteriously dead after ten minutes, precisely at minute 16:44, a second after he questioned whether Robert Mueller deserves the sainthood bestowed on him in Establishment media. The radio studio could find no technical reason to account for why the line dropped abruptly immediately after Ray words that Mueller’s “reputation for honesty does not withstand close scrutiny.”
(Ray’s interview segment runs from minute 6:05 to its premature end at 16:44.)

Interviewer Wilmer Leon adroitly chooses not to “reason why” the abrupt cutoff, and transitions smoothly — well, sort of smoothly — to the next segment.
“Reason Why?” The following might provide a hint.  Before the line dropped, Ray had been speculating that — rather than face the embarrassment of coming up with zero evidence of Trump-Russia collusion — Mueller might accept and promote the kind of “non-existent” evidence touted by miscreants like John Brennan and James Clapper to justify attacking Iraq.
For those of you who do not know, Mueller himself was an important part of all that.  As FBI director at the time, he dutifully parroted that faux-intelligence, and the war-profiteering Establishment gladly drank the Kool Aid.
Mueller had been warned.  Three weeks after Powell lied about operational ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, and three weeks before the attack on Iraq, then-FBI Special Agent and Minneapolis Division Counsel Coleen Rowley sent a Memorandum to Mueller, later published in the NY Times.https://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/05/politics/full-text-of-fbi-agents-letter-to-director-mueller.html
Rowley asked directly:

What is the FBI’s evidence with respect to a connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq? Polls show that Americans are completely confused about who was responsible for the suicidal attacks on 9-11 with many blaming Iraq. And it is clear that this impression has been fostered by many in the Administration. … If the FBI does have independent data verifying such a connection, it would seem such information should be shared, at least internally within the FBI.”


Mueller did not reply.  Did he know the evidence was “non-existent?”  Hey, it was about starting a war of aggression and Muller was head of the FBI.  Did he not ask to see the intelligence?
We are talking out-and-out fraud: not only “intelligence” that was “mis-overestimated,” so to speak, but also some that was, well, poof! — created into existence, like the evidence used by Colin Powell at the UN on Feb. 5, 2003 to claim the existence of a “sinister nexus” between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.

Ray is hardly the the only one to label some of the “evidence” used to “justify” war on Iraq as “non-existent.”  In fact, “non-existent” is one of the adjectives the Senate Intelligence Committee chair used on June 5, 2008, when he announced the bipartisan findiings of the committee’s five-year investigation into pre-Iraq-war intelligence:

“In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent.  As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed.”


The Senate’s findings were published ten years ago and got little play in corporate media.  Those with little or no memory of the Senate investigation may wish to click on the link and skim through its main conclusions, as briefly stated in the press release.

Perhaps most important, no one was held accountable for the pre-Iraq-war fraud
So what’s to lose?