Trump has vehemently denied the claim and no evidence has surfaced to support the allegation.ĭanchenko has been charged with five separate counts of making false statements to the FBI in interviews where he discussed how he obtained information that he later provided to Steele for inclusion in the dossier. Those incriminating words and actions constitute a truly damaging dossier, and it’s not Russian disinformation.Igor Danchenko, a Russian national living in the U.S., has previously defended his role in gathering information that Steele used in his dossier, including the salacious claim that Russian officials may have had a videotape of Trump watching prostitutes in a hotel room during a 2013 trip to Moscow. ![]() He was put in the dock of the House by his own words - and deeds, such as the administration’s stalling of security assistance to Ukraine. Trump, of course, dismissed the scandal that led to his impeachment as a hoax and a continuation of a “witch hunt.” But it was far from that. And it can be argued that Trump did exactly that in 2016 when he said: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” The difference, of course, is that Trump was president when he pressured Zelensky, which makes his conduct even worse than a presidential candidate inviting a foreign power to involve itself in a U.S. Trump’s infamous July 25, 2019, telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky occurred the day after Mueller testified to Congress about the Russia investigation. There is no doubt that he asked Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, a potential (now almost certain) 2020 opponent. ( debunked that talking point here.)īut for purposes of evaluating Trump as a candidate for reelection, the question of whether his campaign colluded with Russia in 2016 is old news. Moreover, the inspector general made clear that, contrary to what some Trump supporters believed, the Russia investigation didn’t begin with the Steele dossier. That demolished a key pillar of Trump’s “witch hunt” narrative. ![]() ![]() (A Los Angeles Times editorial mentioned that possibility in 2017.) In Horowitz’s report, he wrote that the FBI should have done more to examine Steele’s contacts with Russian oligarchs “in order to assess those contacts as potential sources of disinformation that could have influenced Steele’s reporting.” He also found fault with decisions made in the Page surveillance.īut Horowitz also wrote that his investigators “did not find documentary evidence that political bias or improper motivation” influenced decisions to investigate people with connection to the Trump campaign. The idea that the Steele dossier might have contained Russian disinformation isn’t new. Steele’s material was cited by the FBI in application for a court order to conduct surveillance on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign advisor. The vehicle for that meddling, the editorial suggested, was the so-called Steele dossier, a collection of reports provided to the FBI by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent, as part of an investigation funded by Democrats. “The latest disturbing news is that Russia may have received an assist from no less than the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” “Russia interfered in America’s 2016 election, as several government reports have established,” the editorial said. ![]() Horowitz, the Justice Department’s inspector general.Īccording to an editorial in The Wall Street Journal, the new information showed that the FBI was duped by Russian intelligence. The impetus was the release of previously redacted footnotes from last year’s report on the Russia investigation by Michael E. In 2018 President Trump tweeted: “The only ‘Collusion’ is that of the Democrats with Russia and many others.” This week the idea that Trump was the victim, not the beneficiary, of Russian meddling in 2016 was revived.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |