Russian company attacks Mueller indictment as baseless


Lawyers representing a Russian company indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller for supporting meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections accused the United States of hypocrisy in a Monday court filing. Prosecutors say the company provided millions of dollars in funding to the Internet Research Agency, a Russian social media troll farm that investigators say sowed discord in the USA political system from 2014 through 2017.

In addition, Dubelier and Seikaly asked the judge to review the instructions Mueller gave the grand jury that indicted Concord and its co-defendants.

In February, Mueller indicted three Russian companies - the Internet Research Agency, Concord Management and Consulting LLC, and Concord Catering - and 13 Russian individuals, accusing them of conspiring to interfere in the "US political and electoral processes, including the presidential election of 2016".

The company is controlled by Yevgeny Prigozhin, a wealthy businessman who was placed on a USA sanctions list earlier this year and who has ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Fischer wins GOP nomination in Nebraska
Lamb, who is running in the new 17th District, has no Democratic primary opponent and will meet Republican U.S. That hasn't happened in this race, where Trump recorded a campaign robocall over the weekend for Barletta.

Concord said Mueller's motive is his desire "to indict a Russian - any Russian". Special counsel Robert Mueller has withstood relentless political attacks, many distorting his record of distinguished government service.

They say there's no allegation in the indictment that the company meant to break the law, even though the specific laws at issue require the government to show willfulness.

Concord's attorneys said Mueller's claim that Concord conspired to defraud the United States was fatally flawed because it does not allege the company meant to do so.

Besides arguing that the government has no proof that Concord meant to defraud the US government, the company's attorneys argued that a foreign company like Concord could not possibly have known the intricacies of USA election and foreign lobbying laws "that are unknown even to most Americans".