badly. this time it worked. the company s internal documents got hacked, they got stolen off of the company s servers and then they turned up leaked far and wide to try to cause maximum damage to imr. imr sued the company of the putin connected oligarch, sued his company and the russian born d.c. fixer guy who the oligarch hired to manage his dispute with imr. they sued them for computer espionage. an investigator working for the swiss mining company testified in court that he followed the d.c. fixer guy to a coffee shop in london while he was investigating this computer espionage. he says he saw the d.c. fixer guy sit down with a person who appeared to be his client in this matter involving imr. the investigator testified that he heard the fixer guy in that coffee shop explain to his client that his team had successfully hacked into the
where they got opened was on computers on the company of the putin connected oligarch hot lawyers were pursuing in court and who was funding the smear campaign against their client back in the united states. so, that was 2011. interesting case. then it happened again. couple years later, that russian born kremlin friendly d.c. fixer with ties to russian intelligence, the guy who ran the smear campaign that apparently involved this sophisticated hacking on the lawyers computers, that same fixer guy turned up working for another russian oligarch close to putin. this was in 2013. this one owned a mining company that was headquartered in europe. he hired the russian born d.c. fixer guy to go after a rival company in his company. he hired the fixer guy to go
campaign in that interim period between when the democratic party was hacked and when the russians started turning the product of that hack back at the u.s. election and the u.s. media to help trump open hurt clinton, now that we know that a russian-born d.c. fixer who apparently specialized in that kind of work was meeting with the upper echelons of the trump campaign right then. how can we tell if there s a connection. is there a connection between this operative being at that trump tower meeting, that specific expertise under his belt, is there a connection between that and the russian attack on the dnc and the clinton campaign and how the documents hacked out of the clinton campaign and the dnc got repurposed into the campaign to hurt hillary clinton. does his proximity to these previous hacking cases map technically with what happened at the dnc last year in terms of timing, in terms of tactics, in
appears to have done in the past for his clients is he s the guy who makes arrangements for this stuff were the targeting to happen and for the material to be used to maximum benefit for his clients. he s the one who angers the hack and weapon uponizes whatever is stolen in the hack. who knows who his team is who he has doing these acts. but what the times added to our understanding of this part of the case is all of the different ways in which he appears to be connected to russian intelligence. when the deputy head of russian intelligence had to come to washington to do a dog and pony show a few years about about a joint russian policy effort, the guy who shepherded him around washington and went to the events with him was our friend, the d.c. fixer. the deputy head of russian
computers at imr, the investigator testified that he then saw the d.c. fixer guy hand over a thumb drive at the coffee shop that he said a thumb drive that he said contained the documents that had been stolen from imr, the documents that ended up getting leaked all over the place to hurt imr s business stand in this dispute with the russian oligarch who had hired the fixer. so both of those hacking cases had been previously reported. they were interesting like business crime stories, right? but this week the the new york times figured out that there s a crucial link between both of those hacking stories. that fixer guy, this d.c. fixer, this soviet born d.c. fixer with extensive russian intelligence ties in both of these instances, he was the guy hired by putin connected oligarchs for both of these campaigns and in both of these campaigns opponents of the oligarchs that were paying them