The Europeans

The other Europeans

Stephan and Olga Roh

Stephan Roh, a German Multi Millionaire, like many of shadowy figures in this story, is an enigma. Maybe time will tell more. He is writing a book. His wife Olga Roh is featured in the Russian Chapter of the Book. He definately operates an apple cart.
credit and thanks to Natasha Bertrand writing for theAtlantic.com

From Bertand: "Roh and his Russian-born wife, Olga, have homes in Switzerland, Monaco, London and Hong Kong. And then there is a derelict castle in Scotland - buying it made Stephan and Olga the Baron and Baroness of Inchdrewer. Olga was a star in Fox's reality TV show Meet The Russians, in which, surrounded by the trappings of extreme wealth, she purrs: "my family was always achievements orientated." She's extraordinarily well-connected, running an upmarket fashion company in London's Mayfair. Among her customers is Britain's prime minister. There is a photograph of Theresa May meeting the Queen in an Olga Roh coat.

In 2005 Dr. Roh bought Severnvale Nuclear Services Ltd. from its one man-band owner British nuclear scientist Dr. John Harbottle. He then invited Dr. Harbottle on an all-expenses paid trip to a conference in Moscow. But the nuclear scientist was alert to the danger that visitors to Moscow can be targeted or even honey-trapped in compromising situations. Dr. Harbottle said: "We smelt a rat. It didn't sound as if it would ring true and I decided that I wasn't going to go to this meeting." Shortly afterwards, Harbottle was fired. Under Dr. Harbottle the company's turnover had been £42,000 a year. Within three years under Roh, Severnvale Nuclear, with just two employees, was turning over more than $43m/£24m a year. Mr. Roh declined to respond to repeated attempts by the BBC to ask him to explain how he had transformed the business."


How Roh accomplished this is still unknown. Could his success at Severnale Nuclear have anything to do with Kazakstan Uranium, Frank Guistra, Uranium One or the Clinton Foundation?

Mr. Roh has some mysterious links to the Clinton's and their Foundation. They could be just one more coincidence. In 2012 Bill Clinton recieved $500,000 for a speech at The Center for Global Dialogue and Cooperation. This organization has had serious criminal legal troubles (see the link). Bill and Roh both participated. Both made a ton of money in the Nuclear Business.

Clinton and Roh at the Center for Global Dialog and Cooperation. Clinton declined further speaking fees after the indictments.

There is no longstanding "public" connections to the Clintons or the Foundation with Roh. But CGDC was actively involved with the Clinton Global Initiative while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Roh also co-owns Link Campus University in Rome. Link Campus is also casually known as a western spy school. Link Campus in Rome is home to the only foreigner to speak at Hillary's convention. Professor Gianni Pitella. Claire Smith also teaches at Link. So why am I going on and on about Roh and Link Campus? Because Mueller's team picked Stephan Roh up for questioning at the airport on his arrival in New York. He was obviously on the Radar. Roh got picked up when he landed. Why were Mueller's team amassed and waiting for him at the airport?

Roh gets more interesting the more you know. Roh created what would be two shell corporations on the same day, February 16, 2016. The corporations were founded in the Marshall Islands. One of these companies would later become "London Center for International Law Practice". This would be headed by Joseph Mifsud a Maltese Academic. Somehow one of the first hires in February 2016 at LCILP was George Papadopoulos. He was working here when he was hired by the Trump Campaign. The second Company was Link Campus University in Rome (Formerly University of Malta). LCILP also hired but never paid Simona Mangiante. Mangiante would later become PapaD's wife. How did Papadopoulus get here? Where did George come from? Why did the Mueller team wait 6 months after the guilty plea to interview him? How did "the coffee boy" in the Trump campaign get offered thousands of deleted Clinton emails only days after he was hired? Is this true? There are more questions than answers. This is the intersection of the very confusing and contradictory events at the genesis of Spygate. This confusion and non linearity is often a trademark of a hastilly contrived intelligence operation. Papadopolous has since gone public.

The first known American actor in Spygate was George Papadopoulos. James Baker in a recent interview claims PapaD started the FBI investigtion. George was brought into the picture by Joseph Mifsud who was brought into the picture by Stephan Roh who made millions from a Russian Deal in Nuclear Services. We have a start. Then we have George Papadopoulos. What happened in the middle? Who are the keys?

Joseph Mifsud

If Mifsud Is a Russian Spy, Why No Action?...
...According to Roh and Pastor's book, Mifsud believes he was set up, and that George Papadopoulos was part of the sting operation. Roh and Pastor think so, too. Papadopoulos' wife, Simona Mangiante, dismissed the idea her husband was a spy in an Atlantic magazine article. Mangiante knew Mifsud as well. She reportedly started working for the Maltese academic at the London Center for International Law Practice in September 2016, before she met her future spouse. In the January interview, Roh asked Mifsud if he was working for MI6. "No," said Mifsud, "no, never, I was never an agent." This cryptic answer states only he was never "an agent". According to Roh and Pastor's book, however, he's part of an international clique that identifies itself with the values and causes represented by the Clintons and their various enterprises. Mifsud, they write, "was always a 'Clintonist'." Mifsud said something similar in the interview he gave to the Italian newspaper La Repubblica shortly before he went into hiding. "The only foundation I am a member of," he said, is "the Clinton Foundation."

If Roh is an enigma, Mifsud may be more complicated. Mifsud is the key to the start of the investigation. James Baker the Chief Counsel at the FBI, said in a recent interview that PapaD started the investigation. It was his interaction with Mifsud that got the ball rolling. No one seems to know much about Mifsud.

The big question

A huge question is still unanswered. If George Papadopoulus was colluding with Russian spies as alledged in his Mueller DOJ indictment, why have these "Russian spies" (Mifsud, Polonskaya, Timofeev, Halper) not been charged, indicted, or even questioned by the FBI or Meullers Team? Is the FBI and the Special Council stupid, incompetant or more likely complicit? Was Mifsud the genesis of a Brennan/Dearlove covert op?

Lee Smith at RealClearPolitics.com put together a great article years ago. I cut and pasted it.

The Maltese Phantom of Russiagate

By Lee Smith, RealClearInvestigations
May 30, 2018

In the shifting narratives of the Trump-Russia probe, a Maltese academic named Joseph Mifsud has remained a linchpin regarding claims of collusion. He is the professor who allegedly told Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos that the Russians had emails related to the Clinton campaign. The FBI says it opened its investigation in late July 2016 after Papadopoulos relayed that information to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, and the Australians tipped off U.S. authorities.

While some news accounts describe Mifsud as an accomplice to Russian clandestine operations or a “cut-out” (intermediary), others contend he is a full-fledged Russian spy.

In an official report, Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence asserted that “in their approach to Papadopoulos, the Russians used common tradecraft and employed a cut-out,” a “Kremlin-linked…Maltese professor named Joseph Mifsud.”

No one in the American intelligence community has publicly challenged this description.

But there is one major problem with this story: No evidence has been presented to support the claim. Although Mifsud has traveled many times to Russia and has contacts with Russian academics, his closest public ties are to Western governments, politicians, and institutions, including the CIA, FBI and British intelligence services. One of Mifsud’s jobs has been to train diplomats, police officers, and intelligence officers at schools in London and Rome, where he lived and worked over the last dozen years.

The house-of-mirrors nature of the claim that Mifsud is a spy is reflected in the guilty plea Papadopoulos signed on Oct. 5, 2017 for making several material false statements to the FBI. It reads, in part: “Defendant PAPADOPOULOS further told the investigating agents that the professor was ‘a nothing’ and ‘just a guy talk[ing] up connections or something.’ In truth and in fact, however, defendant PAPADOPOULOS understood that the professor had substantial connections to Russian government officials (and had met with some of those officials in Moscow immediately prior to telling defendant PAPADOPOULOS about the ‘thousands of emails’) and, over a period of months, defendant PAPADOPOULOS repeatedly sought to use the professor's Russian connections in an effort to arrange a meeting between the Campaign and Russian government officials.”

If Mifsud truly is a Russian agent – which is key to the collusion narrative – he could prove to be one of the most promiscuous spies in modern history. Western intelligence agencies and European politicians would have to spend the next few decades repairing the damage he did to global security by infiltrating key institutions and personnel. As of yet, however, there is no indication that any intelligence service has begun the embarrassing, but highly important, assessment of how it was penetrated and how it can re-fortify the vulnerabilities that Mifsud may have exposed. There has been no public effort to arrest him.

While most media accounts have simply repeated official claims that Mifsud is a sketchy character whose visits to Russia and academic contacts suggest he is working for Russian intelligence, a look at the available evidence challenges that narrative. It also raises the possibility that Mifsud, whose circles are tied to the Clintons, may, like another professor recently in the news, Stefan Halper, have actually been working for Western intelligence agencies.

Disappearance

Painting a full picture of Mifsud is difficult because after the 58-year-old professor was first identified by name in a Washington Post article in the weeks following Papadopoulos’ confession, he gave a few interviews to the international press, and then disappeared.

Rumors circulated in the press that the [alledged] Kremlin-linked professor may have been recalled to Russia or was liquidated.

A new book by former colleagues of Mifsud’s – Stephan Roh, a 50-year-old Swiss-German lawyer, and Thierry Pastor, a 35-year-old French political analyst – reports that he is alive and well. Their account includes a recent interview with him. Their self-published book, “The Faking of Russia-gate: The Papadopoulos Case, an Investigative Analysis,” includes a recent interview with Mifsud in which he denies saying anything about Clinton emails to Papadopoulos. Mifsud, they write, stated “vehemently that he never told anything like this to George Papadopoulos.” Mifsud asked rhetorically: “From where should I have this [information]?” Mifsud’s account seems to be supported by Alexander Downer, the Australian diplomat who alerted authorities about Papadopoulos. As reported in the Daily Caller, Downer said Papadopoulos never mentioned emails; he spoke, instead, about the Russians possessing material that could be damaging to Clinton.

This new detail raises the possibility that Mifsud, Papadopoulos’ alleged source for the information, never said anything about Clinton-related emails either. In interviews with RealClearInvestigations, Roh and Pastor said Mifsud is anything but a Russian spy. Rather, he is more likely a Western intelligence asset. According to the two authors, it was a former Italian intelligence official, Vincenzo Scotti, a colleague of Mifsud’s and onetime interior minister, who told the professor to go into hiding. “I don’t know who was hiding him,” said Roh, “but I’m sure it was organized by someone. And I am sure it will be difficult to get to the bottom of it.” Roh said Mifsud was afraid when he first went into hiding. “He had been moved to a place far away in Italy. In November and December, it broke him down. He was under so much pressure and cut off from the world. He had no internet or access to communications.” [does this foreshadow an upcoming "suicide"?]

Pastor and Roh, who hired Mifsud as a business development consultant in 2015, write that far from being a Russian spy, Mifsud “had only one master: the Western Political, Diplomatic and Intelligence World, his only home, of which he is still deeply dependent.” There is plenty of open source material that supports their thesis.

According to his resumé, Mifsud received his BA at the University of Malta in 1982, an MA at the University of Padua in 1989, and later his doctoral degree at Queen’s University Belfast. He worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in his home country of Malta and was involved in its 2004 accession into the European Union. In 2008, Mifsud was named president of the European-Mediterranean University of Slovenia. Contrary to media reports depicting Mifsud as a shadowy figure – an Oct. 31 2017 article in the New York Times, for example, says Mifsud “presented himself as a professor” although “his academic affiliations are hard to pin down” – he was a respected teacher and employed by legitimate academic institutions. He taught at Link Campus University in Rome (photo at top), whose lecturers and professors include senior Western diplomats and intelligence officials from a number of NATO countries, especially Italy and the United Kingdom. Mifsud also taught at the University of Stirling in Scotland, and the London Academy of Diplomacy, which trained diplomats and government officials, some of them sponsored by the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the British Council, or by their own governments. He also taught at the London Center for International Law Practice, where Papadopoulos was also affiliated.

They met, however, in Rome in March 2016 when Papadopoulos was part of a visiting delegation from the London Center and Mifsud was in the Italian capital. Most of their subsequent meetings were in London, including the April 26 breakfast when Mifsud is alleged to have told Papadopoulous that the Russians had dirt on Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. Researchers, including British political analyst Chris Blackburn, have used open sources to show that Mifsud was a well-known figure in Western academic, diplomatic, and intelligence circles. Blackburn, whose research has previously focused on Islamic terrorist groups, has worked with senior leaders within global intelligence agencies. He told RealClearInvestigations that Mifsud’s known contacts suggest he’s not a Russian spy – or he is one of the most successful in history.

Shortly after the FBI opened its counterintelligence probe based on the Papadopoulos information on July 31, the lead agent on the case, FBI Deputy Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok, went to London to investigate. “A counter-intelligence officer would first look at someone’s most frequent contacts,” says Blackburn. “So when Strzok gets to London in early August to look into the Papadopoulos meeting with Mifsud, he would’ve found that one of his most notable contacts is Claire Smith.” Smith is a prominent British diplomat whose biography describes her as an envoy with 25 years of experience and “expert in managing the complexities of global business practices.” Her postings included Beijing and Islamabad. She worked with Mifsud at three different institutions—the London Academy of Diplomacy, University of Stirling, and Link Campus University in Rome. Blackburn believes that Smith’s working relationship with Mifsud is an important piece of evidence. “She was on the United Kingdom’s Joint Intelligence Committee,” says Blackburn. “It’s a very significant institution in the UK’s intelligence community, answering directly to the prime minister.” For eight years, until April 2017, Smith was also a member of Britain's security vetting appeals panel, which, according to its website, is “an independent avenue of appeal for Civil Service staff and contractors whose security clearance has been refused or withdrawn.” “Smith was vetting UK government employees,” says Blackburn. “So how could she have missed that her colleague Joseph Mifsud was actually a Russian spy? She continued to work alongside him. She got her picture taken with him.”

If it’s true the professor was working with Russian intelligence, says Blackburn, “he was in place to recruit anyone he was training, in Rome or London. Effectively, Mifsud would have been a talent spotter for Russian intelligence.” Moreover, explains Blackburn, if Mifsud proved to be a spy, he would’ve compromised a number of high-level European intelligence and diplomatic officials the professor worked with in London and Rome. They include Gianni Pittella, an Italian senator who was previously a member of the European Parliament, where he headed the Socialists and Democrats alliance, one of the Parliament’s most important left-wing blocs. “Joseph is my dear friend,” Pittella told the Italian press in November after news of Mifsud’s alleged involvement in the Russiagate scandal spread. Pittella was a visiting lecturer when Mifsud was director of the London Academy of Diplomacy and is on the Link Campus Foundation's board. Link offers degrees in strategic studies and “diplomatic science.” Blackburn says that among the students who attend Link are police officers from around Europe, especially Italy, Malta, and eastern European countries, as well as a large contingent from Brazil. Link’s president is the former Italian interior minister, Vincenzo Scotti, who is alleged to have told Mifsud to hide.

The CIA has held widely publicized events at Link. In 2004, for instance, the CIA arranged a conference on terrorism there. “‘New Frontiers of Intelligence Analysis,’" wrote David Ignatius in the Washington Post, “brought together officials from intelligence and police agencies of nearly 30 countries.” A 24-year veteran of the CIA named Carol Dumaine, wrote Ignatius, “spent two years arranging the conference with the Link Campus of the University of Malta in Rome.” American intelligence and law enforcement officials are also involved with Link. Former National Security Agency and Central Intelligence Agency officers and analysts regularly teach there. The FBI has trained students at Link since 2010. In September 2016, or two months after the FBI opened its Russia investigation, the FBI’s legal attaché working out of the U.S. Embassy in Rome sent Special Agent Preston Ackerman to conduct a seminar at Link. FBI spokespersons did not respond to requests for comment on the bureau’s past history with Link or Ackerman’s seminar.

In another of the loose threads connected to the Russia inquiry, an FBI colleague of Ackerman’s at the embassy in Rome, Michael Gaeta, was the bureau’s pointman for Christopher Steele, the former British spy who is believed to be the author of the now infamous dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign alleging the Trump team’s ties to Russia. When Steele first started uncovering Trump’s alleged connections to Putin, he reached out to Gaeta, whom he had known from a previous investigation. In July 2016, Steele summoned Gaeta to London to brief him on his Trump findings. And in October, Gaeta called Steele to Rome. According to a Washington Post story, the FBI team there asked Steele if he’d ever heard of Papadopoulos and Steele said he hadn’t. Does that mean the FBI knew the source of Papadopoulos’ information regarding the Clinton emails? If not, they missed a central Russiagate figure who worked only a short cab ride away. Conversely, if they did know Mifsud and thought he was a Russian agent, why did the bureau continue to send agents to teach at Link, with which he had been affiliated for nearly a decade by the time of the Papadopoulos affair? Both the bureau and the CIA were constant presences at the school; surely they’d run across Mifsud before. Many others that the FBI worked with knew him — from high-level British intelligence officials to members of the Italian cabinet. If Mifsud was a Kremlin-linked cut-out, why didn’t the FBI warn the U.S.’s European partners, or even U.S. government agencies, about the man who was at the center of Russiagate? If He Is a Spy, Why No Action?

If Joseph Mifsud truly is a Russian agent, it is odd that neither the Western intelligence agencies he snookered nor the U.S. government is acting as if he is. For instance, the FBI interviewed Mifsud in Washington, D.C., between Feb. 8-12, 2017, less than two weeks after its first interview with Papadopoulos, on Jan. 27, when he admitted to meeting Mifsud and talking about Hilary Clinton emails. Mifsud was in Washington to speak at the large annual conference for Global Ties U.S., an organization that has been a partner of the U.S. State Department for over 50 years. Several State Department officials also spoke at the conference. France’s ambassador to Washington, Gerard Araud, was one of several foreign envoys to the United States who lectured at the 2017 event. So why did the FBI not arrest Mifsud?

The State Department declined to comment when RCI emailed to ask why it did not prevent its officials from appearing at an event with a “Kremlin-linked” figure who was key to Russia’s effort to interfere in the 2016 election. If Mifsud was a Russian spy, it’s unclear why after Papadopoulos’ July 27, 2017 arrest that no U.S. intelligence officials warned their European partners that they were hosting a foreign agent on their territory.

Mifsud met with many senior British politicians, even after the FBI knew of the Downer conversations, and had interviewed Papadopoulos under oath. Mifsud met Alok Sharma, then a Foreign Office minister for Asia/Pacific, and now minister of state for employment, “a couple of times” at least, including at a fundraiser Oct. 19, two weeks after Papadopoulos’ Oct. 5 guilty plea. At that same fundraiser, Mifsud was photographed next to an uncomfortable Boris Johnson, the UK foreign secretary, the most senior intelligence official responsible for running MI6, the UK’s foreign intelligence service, and Government Communications Headquarters, the UK equivalent of America’s National Security Agency.

The office of the special counsel, Robert Mueller, declined to comment when RCI emailed to ask if it alerted the UK government about Mifsud after Papadopoulos’s arrest. British government agencies did not respond by press time to requests for comment about whether the UK had been warned by its U.S. partners about Mifsud before the foreign secretary and other senior politicians mingled with an alleged Russian agent. It appears that U.S. intelligence authorities may have been just as unconcerned about keeping their Italian counterparts informed. For even after the Washington Post revealed his name Oct. 30, Mifsud was giving interviews to the Italian press two days later in the middle of Rome denying that he’d told Papadopoulos anything about Clinton emails. When asked if any action was taken to extradite Mifsud or even interview him further in Europe, the office of the special counsel declined to comment on an ongoing investigation. The office also declined to answer why Mifsud has not been charged. Mueller indicted 13 Russian individuals and three Russian companies for their involvement in a pro-Russian social media campaign during the 2016 campaign cycle. But the “Kremlin-linked” individual that is alleged to have passed the Trump team information about Russia’s interference in the election is at liberty.

Roh recalled that he first met the Maltese professor “10 years ago.” At the time, Mifsud was teaching at the Link Campus in Rome when it was a branch of the University of Malta. Several years later, Roh told RCI, “Joseph asked me to give a speech at Link Campus.” Roh described Mifsud to me as a bridge-builder, between people and institutions, West and East. That’s why he hired Mifsud in 2015 as a business development consultant. The professor boasted of his contacts with Russian academics and got Roh on a panel discussion at an April 2016 symposium in Moscow that was sponsored by the Valdai Discussion Club. Their panel discussion, centering on energy security issues and Russia’s position in the global energy market, was moderated by Ivan Timofeev, Valdai’s program director. Timofeev was part of Mifsud’s broad international network of academics and researchers. Mifsud had connected Roh and Timofeev on a previous trip to Russia the year before.

‘Talking Up’ Connections

Although the two men are clearly fond of Mifsud, they also echo Papadopoulos’ description of the professor as someone who liked to “talk up” alleged connections. “Stephan hired Joseph to help develop his business,” said Roh’s co-author, Thierry Pastor. “He was supposed to introduce him to business figures and officials. Stephan has had an office in Moscow since 2000. He hired Joseph because he wanted to have higher-level contacts. But it turned out Joseph didn’t have those contacts in Russia.” Pastor remembered that Mifsud had spoken about meeting Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. “Yes, he met Lavrov,” said Pastor. “He met him once or twice in a large group. He knows Lavrov, but Lavrov doesn’t know Joseph. His contacts in Russia are with academics.”

The same is true of Timofeev, said Pastor. “Ivan is a young researcher, and highly respected,” he noted. Timofeev is president of the Russian International Affairs Council, a Russian think tank with close ties to Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “Ivan is quite an important person in Russian academic circles,” said Pastor. “But as far as I know, he’s not connected to Russian intelligence services.”

George Papadopoulos apparently saw Timofeev as a conduit to Russian state power. Again Mifsud played the connector, introducing Papadopoulos to Timofeev by email in the middle of April 2016. The Trump adviser and Russian researcher communicated for several weeks by email and Skype, according to Papadopoulos’ plea, to “lay the groundwork” for a “potential” meeting between the Trump campaign and Russian officials. Papadopoulos, as excerpts from his emails at the time show, was single-mindedly determined to arrange a meeting between Trump and Putin.

The Trump campaign had prioritized re-setting relations with Russia, as had the Obama White House before it, as well as every presidential administration since the end of the Cold War. Papadopoulos may have thought the best way to materialize a campaign promise, and advance his station, was to arrange a meeting that any experienced foreign policy hand would have considered highly improbable. The Russian president, like virtually everyone else in the world, believed Hillary Clinton was destined to be the next president of the United States. Putin would be unlikely to meet with her opponent and further alienate a future world leader who had already shown her disdain for his government while she was secretary of state.

Roh and Pastor told me that Mifsud found Papadopoulos too aggressive. Both Mifsud and the Trump campaign adviser half his age were ambitious, quick to seize an opportunity, and eager to be accepted and prove they belonged. Mifsud appears to have been something like a foreign policy impresario. One of his sources of income, he explained to Pastor, comes from chairing foreign policy panels. He traveled the world to rub elbows with prominent figures from the global policy community. At a 2009 conference sponsored by the Italian foreign ministry and the Brookings Institution, for instance, Mifsud appeared alongside well-known U.S. foreign policy experts such as former Clinton administration Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott.

As a foreign policy specialist from a small island nation that typically served as the steppingstone of empires, Mifsud appears to have an acute sense of power and how to position himself favorably. It seems he saw an opportunity in Roh, a multimillionaire who was as interested in foreign policy, diplomacy, and intelligence work as he himself was. Mifsud wanted him to invest in Link Campus. It was Link’s reputation and seeing the school up close that impressed Stephan Roh. “Mifsud told me, ‘You can join,’” said Roh. “So I invested.” In the fall of 2015, Roh bought a 5 percent stake, seeing education as a good investment. “It’s not a large amount,” Roh told me. “But it’s a very impressive institution.” Given the affiliations of Link’s faculty and staff, as well as Mifsud’s pedigree, Roh thinks it’s impossible that the man he hired as a business development consultant is a Russian agent. “The FBI and CIA’s work there would tend to exclude him from being a Russian spy.”

Roh was surprised that the FBI detained him for questioning at JFK Airport when he brought his family to New York in October 2017 on a holiday. “It was pretty scary, like in a film,” Roh told me. “It’s an impression that will stay with my children for a while.” But Roh, whose wife is a Russian fashion designer, found it remarkable that “they didn’t ask me a single question about Mifsud, then after an hour or so I asked, ‘This is about Joseph, right?’ I told them he’s a great guy."

It was after the Mueller interview, Roh said, that he decided he needed to set the record straight, and retrace his relationship with Mifsud and the events that led to Russiagate. That’s when he and Pastor resolved to write a book.

According to Roh and Pastor’s book, Mifsud believes he was set up, and that George Papadopoulos was part of the sting operation. Roh and Pastor think so, too. Papadopoulos’ wife, Simona Mangiante, dismissed the idea her husband was a spy in an Atlantic magazine article. Mangiante knew Mifsud as well. She reportedly started working for the Maltese academic at the London Center for International Law Practice in September 2016, before she met her future spouse. In the January interview, Roh asked Mifsud if he was working for MI6. “No,” said Mifsud, “no, never, I was never an agent.”

According to Roh and Pastor’s book, however, he’s part of an international clique that identifies itself with the values and causes represented by the Clintons and their various enterprises. Mifsud, they write, “was always a ‘Clintonist.’” Mifsud said something similar in the interview he gave to the Italian newspaper La Repubblica shortly before he went into hiding. “The only foundation I am a member of,” he said, is “the Clinton Foundation.”

It’s not clear what Mifsud may have been meant by that — there is no membership, as such, in the Clinton Foundation — except perhaps to identify himself as a part of liberal, internationalist circles, like his friend and Link Campus colleague Gianni Pittella. Pittella made a splash at the 2016 Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, where he took a very vocal position against Donald Trump. “I have taken the unprecedented step of endorsing and campaigning for Hillary Clinton because the risk of Donald Trump is too high,” Pittella told Time magazine. “I believe it is in the interest of the European Union and Italy to have Hillary Clinton in office. A Trump victory could be a disaster for the relationship between the U.S.A. and Italy.”

Mifsud’s worldview, along with his array of European and American contacts, and the lack of response by those high-level figures to the spy charge, have led Roh to conclude that if Mifsud is working for any intelligence agency, it was Western rather than Russian. “I call him an asset, a person who cooperates in an operation, but is not a member of the team.”

If Mifsud was a Western intelligence asset, as Roh and Pastor argue, it’s still unclear what his role may have been in the Papadopoulos case. Congressional investigators on the Republican side speculate that Mifsud may have been part of a sting operation designed to open an FBI investigation on the Trump campaign. Roh and Pastor may be overstating Mifsud’s role when they refer to him as an asset. Maybe he was more like a “cat’s paw,” a person used by someone else to carry out a job for ends and results of which he was unaware. Mifsud’s role then was to pass information, or simply take meetings, that would dirty Papadopoulos. Or the Maltese professor truly is a Russian spy.

If so, Western intelligence services are looking at one of the largest and most embarrassing breaches in a generation. But none of the governments or intelligence agencies potentially compromised is acting like there’s anything wrong. Or he might just be a man who wanted to seem important by repeating a rumor he’d heard to another man who also wanted to seem important. It’s still unclear who may have put him in the middle of a political scandal and for what purposes.

Text of "The Maltese Falcon of RussiaGate" by Lee Smith
Timofeev, Roh and Mifsud at the Valdai Club

Papadopoulos and Mifsud Summary

It is possible that entire mystery of Mifsud and Papadopoulus was Kismet. The talk of thousands of emails never appeared anywhere execpt in the DOJ indictment. The "dirt" on Hillary was never divulged. It may have been one bull shitter, bull shitting another bull shitter. It happens, all the time. "Putin's Neice", Olga Polonskaya was just a grad student working for a St. Petersburg wine company introduced by Olga Roh. But according to Mifsud, "a very good looking one". The Trump campaign never acted. No "dirt" was ever exposed. There was no visible ongoing conspiricy on either side. Maybe Mifsud wanted to be part of the Trump Phenomena or even besmirch Trump , and PapaD wanted a bigger role in the campaign.

Last year The New York Times first revealed (from a leak from the special prosecuter) it was at a boozy night in May 2016, at London’s Kensington Wine Rooms, that Trump’s then foreign policy adviser Papadopoulos told Downer Russia had dirt on Trump’s political rival Clinton. “Within hours of opening an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia in the summer of 2016, the FBI dispatched a pair of agents to London on a mission so secretive that all but a handful of officials were kept in the dark,” the New York Times then reported earlier that month. “Their assignment, which has not been previously reported, was to meet the Australian ambassador, who had evidence that one of Donald J. Trump’s advisers knew in advance about Russian election meddling. “After tense deliberations between Washington and Canberra, top Australian officials broke with diplomatic protocol and allowed the ambassador, Alexander Downer, to sit for an FBI interview to describe his meeting with the campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos.”

This Strzok/Downer meeting was the first officially acknowledged contact. But month's earlier Downer met with former Hillary State Dept. confidante, Elizabeth Dibble. PapaD has since disclosed that he suspected Downer was part of a setup and his meeting was tape recorded. Did downer pass the tape to Dibble? If so, to whom did Diblle pass the tapes?

The media is now referring to this as a bit of nothing. But this 'bit of nothing' in part kicked off the FBI investigation. This makes it something. If this "bit of nothing" was the op constructed by the UK and Dearlove, this could be considered far worse than any Russian Facebook posts. It could be considerered an act of war. The investigation was formally launched on July 30. 2016 according to the FBI. The first known action by the FBI was Peter Strzok's trip to the Australian Embassy just 32 hours later. It is totally obvious that Strzok was meeting with Alexander Downer. This was the penultimate round of British Collusion in the election. The final round would just be hidding the players. The handoff was complete.

But there are still some very big questions

Why did Mifsud dissapear? Why did he leave his wife and newborn child? This is extreme behaviour. He life was obviously threatened. Who is he afraid of?

Why did Stephan Roh write a book?

What did Dearlove and GCHQ do after sending intel to Brennan in 2015? Did they do nothing? Very unlikely. They handed it all to Brennan via Downer. More importantly what did Brennan do?

The handoff to Brennan came from a Hillary State Department Aide - Elizabeth Dibble

None of this would have been on the radar in the US if a "drunken" George Papadopoulus had not blurted to Alexander Downer at a Kensington wine bar steps from Hackluyt's headquarters. Much can be chalked up to Kismet, but this meeting was pre-arranged. Earlier in the book you would have noticed on of the first persons referenced was Alexander Downer. This was not a mistake. Downer was one of the original assets of the "Crossfire Hurricane" operation. It was not an investigation. Downer was run at Papadopoulos.

The Accusations

One coincidental connection to Hakluyt could be only a coincidence. The shear number of coincidences could not possibly be random. Did Hackluyt under the guidance of Sir Richard Dearlove of commit what should be construed as an act of war against the United States? A British corpration and former British Intelligence Leaders attempted to rig an America Election in concert with the head of America's Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan. This could prove to be detrimental to a treasured alliance for over a century. Dearlove and later Brennan in spades would show hubris that should have both of them prosecuted. Hopefully history will get to the bottom of this travesty.

Some Updates (10/2018)

As you know this novel is an evolving entity. George Papadopoulus in October 2018 is now considering removing his guilty plea. He is claiming entrapment. He was sentenced to and served his 14 days in prison. He obviously smells a rat. PapaD said Clinton's good friend Downer appeared to be wearing a wire. Halper was working for the FBI and CIA. The whole thing was a total setup. There were other alleged agents involved. Notably Stephan Halper and Azra Turk His life has been ruined by Dearlove, Brennan and Mueller. He just wants to clear his name. I hope he can. More later.

Next Chapter - John Brennan's Plunge into the abyss