@JuliaDavisNews
U.S. prosecutors say they have a witness who will directly implicate “Putin’s chef” in schemes to carry out election interference overseas. The mystery witness is prepared to testify at a criminal trial set to open in Washington next month.
Feds: Mystery witness will implicate ‘Putin’s chef’ in election interference The trial for a Russian firm is set to open in Washington next month.
By JOSH GERSTEIN
03/04/2020 12:14 AM EST
Updated: 03/04/2020 12:16 AM EST
U.S. prosecutors say they have a witness who will directly implicate a Russian businessman known as “Putin’s chef” in schemes to carry out election interference overseas.
The mystery witness is prepared to testify at a criminal trial set to open in Washington next month in a case special counsel Robert Mueller brought accusing three Russian companies and 13 Russian individuals of meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, a prosecutor declared at a recent court hearing.
The anticipated testimony will focus on the most prominent Russian national charged in the indictment, Yevgeny Prigozhin, a St. Petersburg restaurateur who enjoys close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin and who has expanded his business empire to become a key contractor for the Russian military.
Prosecutors say Prigozhin ran the Internet Research Agency, a Russian firm that allegedly sponsored and coordinated online troll activity during the 2016 U.S. election.
None of the charged individuals are known to have been arrested or surrendered to face the charges, but one of the charged companies linked to Prigozhin, Concord Management and Consulting, hired American attorneys to fight the case.
Evidence at the trial had been expected to consist primarily of emails, budgets and similar records detailing the effort, described in the indictment as Project Lakhta. Where the United States obtained all the records is not clear, but some appear to have come from email accounts hosted by U.S. providers.
Relatively dry testimony was also anticipated from officials who enforce U.S. laws on election funding, foreign-sponsored political activity in the U.S, and visa issuance.
So, the prosecution’s mention at a Feb. 21 hearing of a live witness prepared to detail face-to-face dealings with Prigozhin about election-focused efforts came as a surprise.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Luke Jones said that the witness, who was not publicly named, is set to testify about election-related discussions at “a meeting” with Prigozhin.
Under questioning by U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich, the prosecutor said that the witness has knowledge of plans to interfere in elections in a country other than the U.S. It was not entirely clear whether the witness is also privy to similar details about the alleged U.S. election interference.
“We don’t anticipate testimony describing actual interference somewhere else. ... The purpose of that testimony is purely to establish Prigozhin’s knowledge of the IRA’s activities and his oversight of that,” Jones said. ”It’s context for the conversation between Prigozhin and the person.”
Published reports have linked Prigozhin to similar influence campaigns in African countries, such as Madagascar, but Jones did not say which other country was a topic of discussion at the meeting the witness plans to recount.
Friedrich noted that the indictment in the case does contend that “Project Lakhta had multiple components, some involving domestic audiences with the Russian Federation and others targeting foreign audiences in various countries, including the United States.” However, she pressed Jones on why efforts directed at third countries should even be mentioned at the trial.
“We think it’s relevant because it’s a part of the facts surrounding the meeting and the reason for the meeting,” the prosecutor said.
“Well, it’s a conspiracy to defraud the United States, not any other country,” Friedrich responded.
When Friedrich sought to discuss the issue with the defense attorney representing Concord, the Russian firm set to go on trial next month, the lawyer said he couldn’t do so without getting into matters that are under seal.
“I wouldn’t be comfortable with that,” lawyer Eric Dubelier said.
Friedrich said she planned to take up the subject at a closed court session that followed the public one that day. “I want to continue this under seal at the end,” she said.
Jones provided few hints about the prosecution witness’ identity during the public portion of the hearing. However, in a court filing Monday, prosecutors said they plan to ask that one of their witnesses be permitted to testify under a pseudonym. It is unclear if that witness and the one prepared to talk about meeting with Prigozhin are the same person.
Trying to protect the witness’s identity because of fear of reprisals from the Russian government may be fruitless, one intelligence expert said.
“If the mystery witness is someone who met Prigozhin, then there is certainly a likelihood Priogzhin knows who he or she is,” said Steven Aftergood, who studies classified information for the Federation of American Scientists.
politico.com |
|
