Russia House



More Information...
Democrats Are Repudiating FDR's Precedent of Détente With Russia
By criminalizing alleged "contacts with the Kremlin"-and by demonizing Russia itself-today's Democrats are becoming the party of the new and more perilous Cold War.

By Stephen F. Cohen
More Information...

More Information...
Why Are the Media Ignoring Crucial Parts of the Simpson Testimony?
Fusion GPSs Glenn Simpson painted a disturbing portrait of hedge-fund manager William Browder.

By James Carden
More Information...
Why Senator Cardin Is a Fitting Opponent for Chelsea Manning

By Norman Solomon
More Information...
Putin may win presidential election in first round - poll

More Information...
Democrats search for Russians any Russians for collusion story

More Information...
The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate
In the Watergate era, liberals warned about U.S. intelligence agencies manipulating U.S. politics, but now Trump-hatred has blinded many of them to this danger becoming real, as ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern notes.

By Ray McGovern
More Information...
Lavrov reviews Russia's 2017 foreign policy in annual press Q&A
More Information...
Celebrating Russian Christmas in Brussels. High Politics and High Society Meet in the Grand Dining Room

by Gilbert Doctorow
More Information...
Russia House


The Times Rides to Muellers Rescue

By Patrick J. Buchanan

What caused the FBI to open a counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign in July 2016, which evolved into the criminal investigation that is said today to imperil the Trump presidency?

As James Comeys FBI and Special Counsel Robert Mueller have, for 18 months, failed to prove Donald Trumps collusion with the Kremlin, what was it, in mid-2016, that justified starting this investigation?

What was the basis for the belief Trump was colluding, that he was the Manchurian candidate of Vladimir Putin? What evidence did the FBI cite to get FISA court warrants to surveil and wiretap Trumps team?

Republican congressmen have for months been demanding answers to these questions. And, as Muellers men have stonewalled, suspicions have arisen that this investigation was, from the outset, a politicized operation to take down Trump.

Feeding those suspicions has been the proven anti-Trump bias of investigators. Also, wiretap warrants of Trumps team are said to have been issued on the basis of a dirty dossier that was floating around town in 2016 but which mainstream media refused to publish as they could not validate its lurid allegations.

Who produced the dossier?

Ex-British spy Christopher Steele, whose dirt was delivered by ex-Kremlin agents. And Steele was himself a hireling of Fusion GPS, the oppo research outfit enlisted and paid by the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Writes the Washington Times, Steele paid Kremlin sources with Democratic cash.

Yet, if Steeles dossier is a farrago of falsehoods and fake news, and the dossiers contents were used to justify warrants for wiretaps on Trump associates, Mueller has a problem.

Prosecutions his team brings could be contaminated by what the FBI did, leaving his investigation discredited.

Fortunately, all this was cleared up for us New Years Eve by a major revelation in The New York Times. Top headline on page one:

Unlikely Source Propelled Russia Meddling Inquiry

The story that followed correctly framed the crucial question:

What so alarmed American officials to provoke the FBI to open a counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign months before the presidential election?

The Times then gave us the answer we have been looking for:

It was not, as Trump and other politicians have alleged, a dossier compiled by a former British spy hired by a rival campaign. Instead it was firsthand information from one of Americas closest intelligence allies.
The ally: Australia, whose ambassador to Britain was in an upscale London Bar in the West End in May 2016, drinking with a sloshed George Papadopoulos, who had ties to the Trump campaign and who informed the diplomat that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton.

Papadopoulos had reportedly been told in April that Russia had access to Clintons emails.

Thus, when the DNC and John Podesta emails were splashed all over the U.S. press in June, Amb. Alexander Downer, recalling his conversation with Papadopoulos, informed his government, which has excellent ties to U.S. intelligence, and the FBI took it from there.

The Times story pounds home this version of events:

The hacking and the revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside information about it were driving factors that led the FBI to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russian attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of Trumps associates conspired.

This, the Times assures us, answers one of the lingering mysteries of the past year.

Well, perhaps.

But if Papadopouloss drunken babbling to the Aussie ambassador triggered the investigation in July 2016, why was George not interviewed by the FBI until January 2017?

According to the Times, an FBI agent in Rome had been told by Steele in June 2016 what he had learned from the Russians.

And Steele was interviewed by the FBI in October 2016.

If Papadopoulos triggered the investigation, why the seeming FBI disinterest in him as compared to Steele?

Yet another major question remains unanswered.

If, as the Times writes, the FBI was looking into Russian attempts to disrupt the elections, why did the FBI not open an investigation into the KGB roots of the Steele dossier that was written to destroy the Republican candidate, Donald Trump?

If Trumps alleged collusion with Putin to damage Clinton was worthy of an all-out FBI investigation, why did the Clinton-DNC scheme to tie Trump to Russian prostitutes, using British spies and former KGB agents, not merit an FBI investigation?

Why was there less concern about the Clinton campaigns ties to Russian agents, than to Trumpian collusion that is yet unproven?

Consider what the British spy Steele and his former KGB/FSB comrades accomplished:

They have kept alive a special counsels investigation that has divided our country, imperiled the FBIs reputation, preoccupied and damaged a president, and partially paralyzed the U.S. government.

Putin must be marveling at the astonishing success of his old comrades from KGB days, who could pull off an intelligence coup like this and so cripple the superpower that won the Cold War.