The Illogical Core of “Chain Migration” Sponsor and Grifter Jerome Corsi’s Complaint against Robert Mueller

Amid much fanfare and Twitter blocking, Jerome Corsi has released his “complaint” against Robert Mueller and his team (including even Peter Carr for his serial no comments, which Corsi alleges amounts to leaking grand jury material). The complaint ticks all the boxes you’d expect:

  • Cut and pasted complaints about the bias of Mueller’s team — complete with original and now inaccurate date — that already failed in a Larry Klayman appeal to the DC Circuit
  • Reliance on Judicial Watch’s FOIA of Peter Carr’s serial no-comment answers to claim that Mueller has been leaking grand jury information (citing a number of stories clearly sourced to Trump’s lawyers, with whom Corsi is in a Joint Defense Agreement)
  • A litany of crimes Corsi claims Mueller’s team have committed, up to and including treason; several of the crimes include those that Mueller’s team has said Corsi may be charged with, including subornation of perjury
  • A request to liberate information — his own 302s and grand jury testimony — that would disclose to his co-conspirators the kinds of questions Mueller is asking
  • Gratuitous mention of Uranium One and complaints that Mueller’s team didn’t want to hear about it

In a particularly nice bit of timing, the complaint was released just before Trump committed some of the crimes Corsi claims Mueller’s team committed, including witness tampering.

Grifters gotta grift

Some of the supporting documentation that Corsi includes reveals two of the undisclosed reasons Corsi didn’t accept a plea agreement. First, he worried it would prevent him from being a (as Stephen Miller would call it) “chain migration” sponsor for his wife’s cousin.

More tellingly, perhaps, Corsi claimed he would go bankrupt if he were not able to grift off of accusing Robert Mueller of abuse.

Though as I read his plea, it doesn’t include such restrictions, and if it it did, it would only apply to the subject of his testimony.

The September 13, 2016 release Corsi cites to explain his August 15, 2016 foreknowledge

All that said, I’m quite interested in how Corsi formulates what happened, not least because of the way it fits into the rest of Corsi and Stone’s joint cover story.

First, Corsi situates his actions from 2016 in context of Hillary’s 2015 announcement about her server, not the election.

In a March 10, 2015 press conference, former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted that as Secretary of State she had conducted U.S. Government business through a nongovernment, private email server. Secretary Clinton stated that she had turned over 30,490 emails but deleted nearly 32,000 others.

Immediately after March 10, 2015, people experienced in foreign affairs and national security instantly recognized to a virtual certainty that Clinton’s emails had already been acquired by the espionage services of every major nation and perhaps passed on to terrorist organizations, because (a) the server was not secure and (b) communications of the U.S. Secretary of State would be a high priority for spy agencies.

There are numerous reasons why Corsi might want to frame this complaint this way, not least that he couldn’t claim that Jeannie Rhee has a conflict without making everything about the Clinton Foundation. But we also know that Corsi (though allegedly not Stone) was part of the Peter Smith effort to find the emails Hillary deleted, so it’s rich he complains that the server made her vulnerable to the very spies the Smith effort was soliciting the emails from.

From there he transitions seamlessly (this is the following paragraph) into the DNC leaks.

Ultimately, this story led to further, but different, revelations that Wikileaks was releasing emails from the computer servers of the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) on Friday, July 22, 2016.1 “On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds . . . No Internet service provider . . . was capable of downloading data at this speed.” 2

1 Tim Hamburger and Karen Tumulty, “WikiLeaks releases thousands of documents about Clinton and internal deliberations,” The Washington Post, July 22, 2016,

2 Patrick Lawrence, “A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack,” The Nation, August 9, 2017;

Notably, Corsi focuses on the NGP/Van story in its most breathless form as told in The Nation, one that was subsequently corrected. That’s remarkable for a lot of reasons, not least because the NGP/Van story has been treated by its proponents as a release from Guccifer 2.0, not Wikileaks (Guccifer 2.0 linked to it but did not actually release the file on the WordPress site). If that’s what Corsi wants to claim was the source of his knowledge, then he’s saying he based his deductions on Guccifer 2.0, not anything Wikileaks did. But even that doesn’t help, because that file was not released publicly until September 13, well after the August comments that pose such a legal problem for Corsi and Roger Stone.

To substantiate his divine inspiration story that he deducted that Podesta’s emails would come out, he points to just one story.

Wikileaks actually announced before July 22, 2016, that it would release DNC documents and do so in several batches, which was widely reported ahead of time, including in The New York Times. See Exhibit B, attached.

Corsi’s claim he deducted anything is — as Charlie Savage complains about his own article himself — problematic, as his article only addressed the DNC documents. There actually could be ways to claim you could deduce Podeta’s emails were coming by August 2, 2016, but Savage’s story is not one of them.

This passage makes explicit what was already clear elsewhere: the time period Mueller is interested in is August 2016. And, Corsi says, Mueller accuses him and Stone of “acquiring” foreknowledge, which I find striking given the evidence they acquired not just foreknowledge that the emails would be leaked, but of the specific content of at least some of those emails.

Readers of The New York Times and other news received the same foreknowledge from mid to late July of which the Special Counsel’s office now accuses Dr. Corsi and Roger Stone of supposedly acquiring in August 2016.

Dr. Corsi – as he has stated publicly – noticed that emails to and from Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta were conspicuously missing from the July 22, 2016 public-release of DNC emails. Employing his professional skills and considerable experience as an analyst and investigative journalist, Dr. Corsi logically concluded that Wikileaks would release Podesta’s emails soon in a second round “data dump” from the same group of DNC emails stolen on July 5, 2016.

Note, too, the claim that Corsi predicted a “second” data dump of Podesta’s emails is inconsistent with his own email (cited in his criminal information) that said there would be, “2 more dumps. One shortly after I’m back. 2nd in Oct.” That is, even in his own complaint, he obfuscates between the DCCC or Clinton Foundation emails WikiLeaks was peddling literally days after he returned to the US and the Podesta emails that eventually came out in October.

Special Counsel Mueller and his prosecutorial staff, however, have misrepresented the investigative research of hundreds of journalists into a false narrative that Dr. Corsi and/or Roger Stone “colluded” with Russian intelligence services.

Finally, Corsi describes that Mueller claims this amounts to him and Stone “colluding” with “Russian intelligence services.” Either he’s full of shit, he’s extrapolating from a Mueller allegation shared in proffers that WikiLeaks is tied to RIS, or he’s revealing a more direct accusation than publicly made thus far. All three of those are possibly, with Corsi the most likely guess is always “full of shit,” but the other two are worth noting.

35 replies
  1. Yohei72 says:

    I don’t know if you ever read “Dispatches from the Culture Wars,” the blog from your fellow Grand Rapidian Ed Brayton (through whom I first heard of EmptyWheel), but he’s followed Klayman’s exploits for years. He refers to him as “The dumbest lawyer in America not named Mat Staver,” and Mat Staver as “The dumbest lawyer in America not named Larry Klayman.” This sounds like classic Klayman, with its off-topic political ranting and shoot-yourself-in-the-foot missteps that a first-year law student would know to avoid.

  2. chuck says:

    With, “…stories sourced to Trump’s lawyers,” among other on going obstruction news, how risky is it being a lawyer for Trump? I mean a non-felon, able to practice law as a continuing profession type lawyer.

    • Avattoir says:

      Adumberated? Codgerated? Concalumiated?Concorsed? Condeuced? Conleaptured? Conscrewed? Convented? Dedouched? Flancied? Inderpulated? Redobliquied? Reduked? Revaricated? Stuporsed? Surmisered? Suspeculated? Theoized?

      IAE, I doubt that the intended readers of this corse Klaymation would recognize each and every one of these as nonsensical contrivances.

      • Rugger9 says:

        It reminds me of Jay Leno’s gag he ran for a while about which language Shrub spoke better:  English or Spanish.

        So while George W. Bush has our sympathies on the passing of his father, he still has a lot to answer for starting with Darth Cheney.

        While GHW was definitely an improvement over his son on many levels, let’s not forget how he undermined the Iran Contra investigation using pardons if not being “in the loop” (does anyone really believe a former CIA director wouldn’t know about a CIA op in real time?) with lots of bodies in that wake.

        • Avattoir says:

          Having muellered it all over, I’m thinking now of going with the letter to Whitaker as concorsicated klaymootion.

  3. jf-fl says:

    “Amid much fanfare and Twitter blocking…”

    YES, even and assuming Corsi goes to jail for lying to congress and grand jury (h/t to ari melber for doing the hard work to get his testimony recorded for a trial jury)… even after that I’m hoping that Hollywood will be hiring him as a promoter.

    I’ve never seen a bunch of unbelievable stories and non-sequitorial thinking made to seem halfway interesting. Just think how much better Corsi could make the average crummy February movie release, when he had like real actors and professional budgets to as his inputs to his curation process.

  4. Zinsky says:

    This little toad has confabulated some of the greatest hits of wackadoodle right-wing world over the past three decades without suffering much damage. It is beautiful karma that this repulsive little capillary farm goes down with equally repulsive and worthless Roger Stone and Donald J. Trump.

  5. Rapier says:

    It’s pretty damn sad that man of Corsi’s  stature in the Trump firmament couldn’t get the wife’s cousin a same day visa with a few phone calls.

  6. j says:

    Sorry if this question has been asked and answered elsewhere here. Even though we, the public, do not know who has and has not signed a joint defense agreement, when people such as Corsi or Manafort appear before Mueller, is he allowed to ask whether they are part of a JDA with others who may be called to testify?

  7. Michael says:

    One interesting part- Corsi’s lawyer made a big deal out of the fact that Rhee wanted to keep his guilty plea under seal because of the requirement that he report any convictions to FINRA within 30 days. This letter was dated November 21st. Does this mean that Mueller is still a long way off from announcing the case in chief? Because if Mueller was going to announce the case in chief on January 3rd, for example, Rhee could have just said- OK, you can plead on December 4th.

  8. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Why does the MSM keep saying that Mueller is close to his “end game” for his Russia investigation?

    Concluding that Mueller is done because he’s not worried about what congressional investigations might do – after the Dems retook the House, which checks the Senate as well as the White House – does not necessarily mean Mueller is done. Nor does it mean he’s “done” because he is about to file public access documents regarding Manafort’s alleged breach of his cooperation agreement.

    Those acts might mean many things. That Mueller is voluntarily about to wrap up his investigation is almost surely not one of them.

    • JD12 says:

      This year I think they wrote the narrative ahead of time that Mueller was waiting out the midterms, and now they’re looking at everything as a sign that it’s true. This time last year they were saying it because Trump’s team was telling them.

      There seems to be a lot of groupthink inside the Beltway, and a lot of journalists who gather the pieces but don’t know how to put the puzzle together.

    • Rugger9 says:

      Wishful thinking from the Palace, I would guess since I do not see the House Ds calling any of the OSC dogs off of the scent.  At this point even if Curly Fuzzy Whitaker managed to try to shut down the investigation, the Ds would just run Mueller’s show out of one of the House committees.  Exposure of the crimes is one of the things Kaiser Quisling fears, maybe even more than the possibility of jail time. Of course Fuzzy has to explain his potentially criminal activity with the patent company.

      OT, but apparently Corey is on Ethan Berman’s show bitching about the deep state and pitching his book about Trump’s enemies.  What he leaves out of his rant about Carter Page (an American citizen in NYC) being targeted for FISA warrants was that ol’ Carter had been a  well documented Soviet Russian contact and THAT is what made him FISA bait.

      • uppercut says:

        So far Mueller’s done the Russian troll side, probably obstruction, now working on principals in the conspiracy it would seem. Still looking for more than just the Tower meeting(s), though foreknowledge is bad enough…. Was the Cambridge Analytica Facebook data and DCCC stolen material weaponized for or by the campaign? Did Americans help Assange organize/time the email releases for greatest political impact? Haven’t heard much on this side of the story. Maybe part of the last chapter?

        • Rugger9 says:

          Parscale is someone who needs more Mueller attention (and may have it, we don’t know) since much of the mechanism is his design.

    • BroD says:

      Yeah I was giggling last night about reports that Mueller was moving to “wrap up” as if we should expect his “report” under the tree.

  9. koolmoe says:

    This quote:

    “On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds . . . No Internet service provider . . . was capable of downloading data at this speed.”

    Is often bandied about and is simply not a thing.
    I have a consumer-level connection that downloads at 50 megabits-per-second (Mbps), which is about 6.25 megabytes-per-second (MBps). I’m often solicited by my provider to upgrade (for a nominal fee!) to 100 Mbps, or 12.5 MBps.

    The speed the quote dismisses would equate to 22.7 MBps  [1976/87]…which equates to about 181.6 Mbps*.

    And old school T3 line will get you 45mbps at the top end. T3 lines can be bundled, and and often were to serve as redundant backbones for organizations like ISPs.

    These days, ISPs, NOCs, datacenters, Rack hosts, etc often use ‘OC’ variations on their redundant trunks; the lowest being an OC3 with an average of 155 Mbps minimum.
    If you’re a higher-end provider, you’ve probably got OC12 (622 Mbps) or even GigE (1000 Mbps).

    So datacenters and ISPs *could indeed* certainly provide an outward bound pipe that could deliver this nefarious data at 181.6 Mbps.
    It’s a bit more unlikely the recipient could retrieve the data, however, in that time…if they were on a typical, lower-end consumer service (i.e. 50mbps)…but maybe they were on a higher end one…such as Verizon’s 1gb plan, which has been around at least a couple years, and would result in a 1000 Mbps connection. Or maybe the hacker/recipient was in a NOC itself.

    All that to say, that one quoted paragraph is nonsense. It only works if you envision a hacker on an old laptop in the basement going out over the family DSL connection…throw in some oldschool modem screeching for good measure.


    *we use Mbps – megabits per second – as that is the common measure used in most net connection sales and datapoints.

  10. bloopie2 says:

    EW:  Just thought I’d point this out in case you’ve missed it.  Google News headline says “The ISS has a robot aboard, and he’s being kind of a dick”.  Unfortunately, clicking the link to the Quartz article shows that your favorite word is not replicated in the article itself.  Rather Richard-ish of them, no?

  11. Mitch Neher says:

    I’m so confused.

    Does Corsi’s claim entail that Stone must now admit that he knew ahead of time that Guccifer 2.0 was an online persona that the GRU used to communicate with Stone while disseminating hacked emails through Wikileaks?

    I’m so confused.

    • Mitch Neher says:

      Clarification: How, in August of 2016, could Corsi logically preclude the possibility that Guccifer 2.0 might eventually release the John Podesta emails?

    • Mitch Neher says:

      I’m sorry for babbling out loud in public. Here’s my point:

      Remember the case of the dog that didn’t bark because the dog was friendly with the horse thief? Why didn’t Roger Stone ask Guccifer 2.0 for the emails he sent Corsi to get from Assange? Because Stone already knew that Guccifer 2.0 was the GRU.

      • Rugger9 says:

        I think the Mueller report when/if released will answer that question, but I would agree that something that should have happened but doesn’t can be every bit as important as the things that do happen.

  12. Trip says:

    OT, but goddam important. Instead of the 24/7 fawning over G Bush, would it kill the “progressive” channels to cover the Climate Catastrophe? At least dedicate 5 minutes a day, every day.

    News Networks Fall Short on Climate Story as Dolphins Die on the Beach

    Citing the NASA finding that 97 percent of actively published climate scientists agree that warming trends are “extremely likely due to human activities,” Professor Kirtman said cable news shows should book three skeptics for every 97 nonskeptics. “You have 97 percent of climate scientists who understand the science and know what the reality is, and then you find a podiatrist from Yahupitz who’s going to tell you not to worry,” he said. “It’s a false equivalence.”

  13. Sean Lamb says:

    ““I noticed there weren’t any Podesta emails in there. In July, flying over to Italy I thought, ‘I bet Assange has Podesta’s emails,’” Corsi asserts.”


    It would probably help Mueller’s case considerably if there was an email pre-October 2016 where Corsi says “Wikileaks/Assange has Podesta’s emails.”  Because he seems to have neglected to include that in his indictment.

    All there was was some vague speculation of unspecified documents containing information about the Clinton Foundation

  14. Tom says:

    I think a large part of the fawning over Geo. H. W. is to draw a contrast between him & the current occupant of the White House. And I’m sure Individual-1 knows it.

    • Trip says:

      While some of that is surely true, it’s also being used in the reverse: to wash away all of Bush’s sins, along with the conservative party’s, (which and who created Trump). “See, we’re not so bad, look how nice Bush was to the people who surrounded him!”. (especially by the never-Trumpers on progressive TV).

      Adding: and while I’m at it, why does the Federal gov’t, including the Post Office have to close? It’s all so over the top.

Comments are closed.