Talk:Concord Management and Consulting/Archive 1

Speed deletion avoided
Thank goodness for responsible editors and contributors. Some odd forces in play to write history. Wikipietime (talk) 14:55, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Dito Wikipietime (talk) 02:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


 * further notation Wikipietime (talk) 03:29, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (it is more than just an article about a company as the description states and represents the financial backing of the largest alleged threat to the democratic process of the United States. The brevity of the article is far outweighed by the significance of the company.  See for yourself  https://www.google.com/search?q=Concord+Management+and+Consulting&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj60tStyavZAhVFvlMKHWPYAlYQ_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=637 ) --Wikipietime (talk) 20:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

So? Looks like it stands. Wikipietime (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Haste
Pardon my haste in submitting a brief article. This company should have been an article long ago. --Wikipietime (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

--Wikipietime (talk) 20:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Concord Management Demands speedy trial, info on surveillance of the company and its employees.

 * But on Wednesday, one of them, Concord Management and Consulting, LLC, dispatched a pair of lawyers to federal court in Washington to plead not guilty to the charges. One of the lawyers, Eric Dubelier, said Concord would "exercise our right to a speedy trial."
 * Mueller's office said in a court filing last week that Concord's lawyers had already demanded that prosecutors turn over "sensitive intelligence gathering, national security, and foreign affairs information," including details on electronic surveillance of the company and its employees.
 * Partly in light of those demands, prosecutors asked the court to put off Concord's arraignment. U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich denied the request without explanation.
 * https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/05/09/concord-management-arraignment-russia-investigation/594454002/

We may soon see if Mueller has any evidence. Should there be a separate article for the legal proceedings?
 * Keith McClary (talk) 23:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe. We probably won't know whether a separate article is warranted until a trial gets going.  In the mean time, day-to-day proceedings can be logged at Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2018).  Websurfer2 (talk) 18:30, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Charges dropped
The DoJ moved to drop charges against two Russian shell companies accused of financing efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. Concord Management and Concord Consulting were indicted by Robert Mueller’s team in 2018 (along with 13 Russians and the Internet Research Agency) for using social media to spread disinformation, exacerbate U.S. social divisions, and sabotage the 2016 election. Prosecutors recommended that the DoJ drop the charges to prevent Concord from accessing and potentially publishing a cache of documents that includes details about the government’s sources and methods for investigation. In a motion filed on Monday (March 16), prosecutors said Concord is “eager and aggressive in using the judicial system to gather information about how the United States detects and prevents foreign election interference.” Prosecutors are still pursuing charges against the 13 Russians and the Internet Research Agency. X1\ (talk) 20:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/us-justice-dept-abandons-prosecution-of-russian-firm-indicted-in-mueller-election-interference-probe/2020/03/16/5f7c3fd6-64a9-11ea-912d-d98032ec8e25_story.html
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/us/politics/concord-case-russian-interference.html
 * https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/16/russia-election-justice-department-132875
 * https://www.axios.com/justice-department-russian-trolls-internet-research-agency-9bf95c0d-2f6a-4377-84a5-c5f3eb8c4abb.html
 * It is not over. You do not know Prigoshin if you said that, they can sue people over the food that poisoned them but produced by his companies, he is a rather bad guy... Anyway, yes, Concord sued US for 50 billion $USD https://www.google.com/search?q=concord+sues+50+billion 2A00:1FA0:8CE:7E0F:5440:FDFA:5BB3:84F3 (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: The first paragraph was apparently copied from https://whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com/2020/03/17/day-1153/ - the site says the content was curated by @matt_kiser and the license is "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International". Politrukki (talk) 09:15, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * your original question was in the header "charges dropped, but not because not appropriate, but to protect sources and methods ; how to word?" (which I'm now shortening to "Charges dropped"). I have updated the article. Does this answer your question? Politrukki (talk) 11:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Time for refresh
Muddying the waters is a strategy that works. This article was marked for speedy deletion. Wikipietime (talk) 15:32, 26 September 2020 (UTC)