Fired FBI special agent Peter Strzok tried to distance himself from British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s dossier, critiquing some of the former MI6 agent’s anti-Trump election reporting while criticizing those he saw as using its weaknesses to undermine the Trump-Russia investigation.
Strzok, who was a key member in the FBI’s investigation into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s improper private email server and Crossfire Hurricane’s Trump-Russia inquiry, made the comments during an interview with Anne Applebaum of the Atlantic.
“The Steele report was a problem for the investigation because it sent people off on a series of wild-goose chases,” Strzok said, adding, “the report was very typical of information that the FBI often receives. It comes from several sources, including some suspect sources. Some of it is bullshit, and some of it is rumor, and some of it is disinformation.”
Ukraine impeachment witness and the National Security Council’s former Russia expert similarly called Steele’s dossier a “rabbit hole” that “very likely” contained Russian disinformation.
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a report in December that criticized the Justice Department and the FBI for at least 17 “significant errors and omissions” related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and for the bureau’s reliance on Steele’s discredited dossier.
Steele put his research together at the behest of Fusion GPS, which was funded by Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
Declassified footnotes from Horowitz’s report indicated that the bureau became aware that Steele’s dossier might have been compromised by Russian disinformation, and FBI interviews showed Steele’s primary subsource undercut the credibility of the dossier.
Strzok claimed that the “problem” with the Steele dossier “got worse after it was published by BuzzFeed” in January 2017.
……A host of journalists and commentators touted the dossier, and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff read portions of the dossier into the congressional record in March 2017.
A recently declassified document showed Strzok’s typed comments critiquing the assertions made in a New York Times article from February 2017. Strzok apparently referenced the January 2017 conversation with Steele’s primary subsource, writing that “recent interviews and investigation, however, reveal Steele may not be in a position to judge the reliability of his sub-source network.”
The notes by Strzok also appeared to cut against the FBI’s assertion in FISA application filings that “the FBI believes that Russia’s efforts to influence U.S. policy were likely being coordinated between the RIS [Russian Intelligence Services] and Carter Page, and possibly others” — Strzok’s notes indicated that “we have not seen evidence of any individuals affiliated with the Trump team in contact with IOs [intelligence officials],” and “we are unaware of ANY Trump advisers engaging in conversations with Russian intelligence officials.”
Strzok told the Atlantic that “from our perspective, some of it was a distraction” because “it didn’t talk about” Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos or “much about” retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn or Russia’s disinformation efforts on social media, which he claimed were “the things we were focused on.” Strzok said the dossier contained “a lot about” Page, “who in the end, made up, I think, seven pages of Mueller’s whole report” and “was a tiny little slice of this whole huge host of activity.”
Horowitz concluded the dossier formed a “central and essential” part of the decision to surveil Page.
Documents declassified earlier in 2020 indicated that Strzok abruptly stopped the FBI from closing its investigation into Flynn in early January 2017 at the insistence of the FBI’s “seventh floor” after the bureau had uncovered “no derogatory information” on Flynn. Emails showed Strzok and Page sought to continue investigating Flynn, even considering the Logan Act.
……U.S. Attorney John Durham, tasked with investigating the origins of the inquiry, made a rare public statement disagreeing with that conclusion.
“Our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department. Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S.,” Durham said. “Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”
Attorney General William Barr agreed, saying Horowitz’s report “makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.”
Strzok lamented Friday that “some people have sought to use the weaknesses of the Steele reporting to try and cast aspersions against the entirety of the FBI’s massive investigation.”
That’s because the entire “Russian collusion” accusation was a hoax.
Ex-FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith pleaded guilty to a false statements charge in Durham’s investigation in August. Clinesmith admitted he fraudulently changed a CIA email to state that Page was “not a source” for the CIA.
Former British spy Christopher Steele was responsible for the dossier used to push the narrative that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. After a two-year-long investigation, Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded that no collusion took place.
What many people wanted to know: where did this collusion narrative come from?
It turns out that 42-year-old Igor Danchenko, a Russian-born analyst living in America, was Steele’s primary source, the Daily Caller reported. Although Danchenko’s identity was redacted in a newly-released FBI memo, a Twitter user pieced together key pieces of information that revealed who the source was. The New York Times later confirmed Danchenko’s identity.
Danchenko’s attorney, Mark E. Schamel, confirmed the suspicion: his client was one of the main sources behind the Steele dossier.
Interestingly enough, some of Danchenko’s statements to the FBI contradicted the dossier. Danchenko made it clear that the information was “rumors and speculation” and couldn’t be confirmed. Steele ended up using those rumors to make his case appear to be more solid than it actually was.
The entire “Russian collusion” hoax fell apart during the first month of Trump’s presidency.
All this shit can be traced back to Hillary’s campaign and Obama’s regime. They went to insane lengths in an attempt to subvert the election. All of the perps in this conspiracy should be in orange jumpsuits.