Clinton Emails
It was the spring of 2016. The FBI counter-intelligence division was embroiled in the politically explosive Clinton email investigation. They were analyzing whether the former Secretary of State knowingly and intentionally put classified emails on her personal email account. Secretary Clinton had thousands of “work” emails on her personal server, located in the basement of her home in New York. When she left office, her attorneys arranged for thousands of them to be destroyed.
The illegal act was there, putting government emails on a private server. The Secretary “demonstrated” knowledge of guilt by trying to “cover it up” by having the emails destroyed. Members of her staff were “taking the Fifth.” The sole factor preventing an indictment: proof that she had “the requisite intent” to violate the law.
There was disagreement within the FBI. Many, including perhaps the Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, believed that if Hillary Clinton didn’t have “intent,” she still acted in such a reckless manner that indictments were warranted. Others in the investigation, ultimately including FBI Director James Comey, could not find in her actions overwhelming proof of that final step.
And, of course, she was the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party for President of the United States. Beyond that, she was the overwhelming favorite to win. So there was that.
Russian Connections
In the middle of this mess, the FBI counter-intelligence team began to get disturbing information about Trump campaign contacts with Russian intelligence. The campaign designated Carter Page as one a foreign policy advisor. Page was the subject of FBI investigation in 2014 because of his involvement in a Russian spy ring. No charges were brought against him at the time, but the FBI was still watching him.
And Mr. Trump hired Paul Manafort as chairman of his campaign. The FBI knew that Manafort was indebted to Russian oligarchs close to Vladimir Putin. They also had concerns about Manafort’s actions in Ukraine, where he received millions of dollars for work supporting the Russian backed President. Much of that money was not declared as US income.
A third advisor, retired General Mike Flynn, had travelled to Moscow. He went without the normal clearances from the military required of a former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Flynn literally sat at the right hand of Vladimir Putin at a banquet there, and received a $40,000 payment for speaking (eventual Green Party Presidential candidate, Jill Stein, sat at the same table.) In addition Flynn was doing work for the Turkish Government while working for Trump.
Democrats Hacked
Also in the spring of 2016, the FBI discovered that the Democratic National Committee’s computers had been hacked. The hacking programs were of such sophistication that they could only be from a national military source (as opposed to a 400 pound man in a basement.) The infection was so significant, that polling data, opposition research, financial data, and email archives were stolen.
But, while counter-intelligence alarm bells were going off, none of those actions were enough to become the “predicate,” or legal cause for an investigation of the Trump campaign. It would take some evidence of them committing an illegal act.
Papadapoulos Brags
In May of 2016, another designated Trump foreign policy advisor, George Papadapoulos, met Alexander Downer, the Australian Ambassador to the United Kingdom. In the course of their conversation, Papadapoulos told Downer that the Russians had DNC information and emails, and planned to release them in order to damage the Clinton campaign (National Review.) Australia, along with the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand; is a member of the “Five Eyes” counter-intelligence community that shares information. Downer reported the conversation to the FBI.
For the record, this conversation took place a month before Christopher Steele was hired by Fusion GPS to work on opposition research against Donald Trump. It was at least three months before Steele compiled his first report.
Predicate for Investigation
By July of 2016 the FBI knew that the DNC computers were hacked, and Downer’s information said Russia did it. They knew that a Trump advisor, Papadapoulos, had contact with the Russians and been told the Russians planned to use it against Clinton. Other Trump advisors, Page, Manafort and Flynn, had more than questionable contacts with Russia. All of this not only provided the “predicate” for opening an investigation into the Trump campaign contacts, but it raised the specter of Russian corrupting a US Presidential campaign. To not open an investigation would be dereliction of duty.
Republican Response
Recently Republicans have raised concerns about “Democrats and the Deep State Intelligence Community” spying on a Republican Presidential campaign. Attorney General Barr intentionally used the word “spying” to characterize the actions of the summer of 2016.
Republicans used two issues to try to declare the “predicate” as invalid. The first was that the Steele Dossier was somehow used as underlying information. While the Steele Dossier was not available when the investigation was started, it was mentioned later on in a FISA Warrant extending surveillance of Carter Page. Republicans seized on that mention, claiming that “Democrat Opposition Research” was used to investigate the Trump Campaign.
The Steele Dossier is a report compiled by former British intelligence agent, Christopher Steele. While it was intended for use as partisan opposition research, the information Steele discovered was so explosive that Democrats didn’t use it. Steele himself was a trusted source for US intelligence; his work on the FIFA bribery scandal was used to help convict several of the organization’s officials. To date, many of the statements in the Dossier have proven to be factual and none have been disproven (Lawfare.)
Mifsud
But attacking the Steele Dossier wasn’t enough. Republicans weaved a tale to discredit Papadapoulos, trying to remove the “predicate.” Papadapoulos eventually testified that he got the “tip” about Russia’s hacking from an obscure Maltese Professor, Joseph Mifsud. Mifsud was a professor at the London Academy of Diplomacy, a representative of the government of Malta, and has a close relationship to the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin. Former FBI Director Comey has testified that the Bureau considered Mifsud a Russian agent.
Republicans have created involved theories portraying Mifsud as a double agent, working for the United States. They suggest that the FBI had Mifsud plant the hacking information by talking to Papadapoulos, to create the “predicate.” While there is little evidence to back this claim, it’s easy to make. Mifsud was last in the United States on February 11, 2017. He disappeared into Europe, and hasn’t been heard from since (NYT.)
Republicans claim as “proof” for their theory the fact that Mueller didn’t indict Mifsud. They reason that he must be protected by US intelligence, but there is a much less complicated explanation. Muller’s team was only able to question Mifsud once before he disappeared. To make a conspiracy indictment, the Mueller team would require a lot more evidence than they had from that one interview.
The Message
Republicans are sending a clear message to the US Intelligence Community: we won, don’t investigate. The leaders of the Russia investigation are now all gone from government service, driven out or fired. The list is long: Comey, McCabe, Ohrs, Strzok, Baker, Page, and others. This week, the President accepted the resignation of the Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, perhaps the last man in the administration who would speak the truth. Trump’s replacement: Texas Congressman John Ratcliffe, one of the leaders of the “Deep State Conspiracy.” It is just one more step in burying Russia’s intervention in our election. Trump is saying: “Russia, if you listening, I could use your help again in 2020.”
