In a scathing opinion piece published in the New York Post on Wednesday, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy delivered a crushing blow to the FBI for its dishonest handling of both President Donald J. Trump and Hunter Biden, the son of Joe Biden.
McCarthy reported on Special Counsel John Durham’s most recent activities in what will probably be his last trial regarding the Crossfire Hurricane-Russia Collusion Hoax.
Durham had a memorable week because he discovered a strange $1 million payment paid to a man to confirm a spooky dossier that the FBI had long since sworn was accurate.
McCarthy commented on the lack of response from the organization to the blatant crimes done by Hunter Biden, and he summarized what he witnessed from his point of view as follows:
The FBI is now on trial in addition to Igor Danchenko.
As the trial against Danchenko enters its third day in a federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, that is the focus of the special counsel for Russiagate, John Durham, prosecution.
Danchenko is accused of five counts of lying to the FBI about two of his sources for the now-famous “Steele dossier”—a collection of fabricated intelligence reports, primarily written by former British spy Christopher Steele—that painted the Republican Party’s then-presidential candidate, Donald Trump, as a covert agent of Russia.
Steele’s major source was Danchenko.
Durham essentially accuses him of concealing from the FBI that he was getting some information about the Trump campaign from Clinton political ally Charles Dolan and (b) falsely claiming he received explosive information from Sergei Millian, a Belarusian American who was tangentially connected to Trump, alleging the Republican candidate was engaged in a “conspiracy of cooperation” with the Kremlin.
It is uncertain whether Durham will be able to support these allegations:
Despite the fact that Danchenko did make a hazy reference to discussions with Dolan, the accusation against him is not quite clear, and Millian has declined to testify because she is out of the country and cannot be subpoenaed by the US.
Former British spy Christopher Steele was given a $1 million reward by the FBI if he could back up the claims in his infamous dossier.
However, there is no denying that the trial is bringing attention to the FBI’s appalling misconduct in the Trump-Russia “collusion” investigation, which it code-named “Crossfire Hurricane.”
Brian Auten, an FBI senior intelligence analyst, was the case’s first witness, and Durham himself interviewed him for the prosecution.
Auten acknowledged that the FBI had given Steele a $1 million reward if he could back up his sensational claims that Trump was conspiring with Vladimir Putin’s government and that the Kremlin was ready to extort the then-candidate because it was purportedly in possession of a video recording of Trump acting inappropriately.
Because Steele and Danchenko were unable to support the charges in the dossier, the agency was ultimately never required to pay the $1 million.
In actuality, Durham’s investigation revealed that the alleged urine tape was a total fake, according to court documents.
Furthermore, Danchenko disproved Steele’s reports when the FBI eventually spoke with him, months after it first received it. He called it a screed of rumors and innuendo, most of which had been exaggerated and presented as professional intelligence research.
But more importantly, the FBI’s willingness to pay such an astronomical sum in the expectation that Steele’s anti-Trump allegations could be supported is unequivocal evidence that the agency was aware these allegations were unsubstantiated.
That is crucial.
The FBI must confirm information before submitting it to the court when asking for surveillance warrants, according to the Justice Department’s and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s guidelines.
The FBI relied on the Steele allegations in sworn applications despite the fact that it was unable to substantiate them and had every reason to believe they were overstated, if not flat-out wrong.
In October 2016 and mid-January 2017, the FBI successfully applied for FISC monitoring orders to keep tabs on Carter Page, a former adviser to the Trump campaign. They did this by arguing to the court that Trump appeared to be involved in a corrupt conspiracy with the Kremlin.
The FBI finally spoke with Danchenko in late January, and he refuted Steele’s reporting.
However, even after consulting with Danchenko, the FBI persuaded the court to extend the surveillance in April and June 2017 by relying once more on Steele’s claims, this time under oath.
The same analyst who claimed to have received a $1 million offer also sent the FBI a report discrediting Hunter Biden’s laptop as containing Russian propaganda.
Furthermore, the FBI neglected to inform the Justice Department and the court that Danchenko had refuted Steele’s assertions.
In order to “further corroborate” Steele’s reporting, the FBI informed the court that it had spoken with Danchenko (which actually had not been corroborated).
The bureau went on to say that in doing so, it discovered Danchenko to be “truthful and cooperative.”
More on this story via The Republic Brief:
Of course, what the FBI didn’t mention was that what Danchenko had been “truthful and cooperative” about was the fact that Steele’s claims were sheer nonsense… CONTINUE READING…