Russia Analyst Deals a Major Blow for Trump

Igor Danchenko, Russia Analyst

Igor Danchenko, an analyst from Russia who contributed a significant amount of research to the infamous dossier of unverified allegations and rumors about former president Donald J. Trump and Russia, was found not guilty on Tuesday on four counts of misrepresenting a source to the F.B.I.

The special counsel, John H. Durham, was appointed by Attorney General William P. Barr three years ago to look into the F.B.I. investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.  It suffered yet another crushing defeat as a result of the verdict.

Trump and his allies have long believed that the investigation would demonstrate a “deep state” plot against him. But Durham never discovered and charged one after investigating a number of flimsy possibilities. Instead. he created two limited cases in which he falsely accused those involved in outside investigations into alleged connections between Trump and Russia.

A cybersecurity lawyer with connections to the Democratic Party. Michael Sussmann was found not guilty in the first of those trials. The prosecution of Durham is anticipated to end with the trial of Danchenko, and the special counsel is anticipated to deliver a final report to the Justice Department this year that includes a summary of his conclusions.

After a day of deliberation, the jury returned a not-guilty verdict for Danchenko.

The allegations against Danchenko, a Russian-born analyst, focused on two of his sources for the sleazy assertions and unproven allegations in the infamous Steele dossier, which claimed that Trump and his 2016 campaign were working together with the Russian government. Public mistrust of Trump increased when BuzzFeed published the dossier in 2017, but it has subsequently been debunked.

After a day of deliberation, the jury returned a not-guilty verdict for Danchenko.

Allegations

The allegations against Danchenko, a Russian-born analyst. Focused on two of his sources for the sleazy assertions and unproven allegations in the infamous Steele dossier. Which claimed that Trump and his 2016 campaign were working together with the Russian government. Public mistrust of Trump increased when BuzzFeed published the dossier in 2017, but it has subsequently been debunked.

A prosecutor working for Durham claimed during Monday’s closing statements that Danchenko had unmistakably lied to the F.B.I. His fraudulent claims had a significant impact. The prosecutor continued. Citing a section of the dossier that the F.B.I. had used to support requests to wiretap a former adviser to the Trump campaign who had ties to Russia.

A U.S. citizen was subjected to extensive surveillance as a result of this defendant’s lies, according to the prosecutor, assistant special counsel Michael Keilty.

By telling the jury that “the whole house of cards of the dossier crumbles” in the face of the evidence, Durham attempted to extend the scope of the case.

The defense, however, argued that Danchenko did not lie because of the government’s own evidence. Danchenko was described by his attorney, Stuart A. Sears, as a valuable and trustworthy F.B.I. asset who unintentionally became mixed up in a politically inflamed case. He claimed that Durham had Danchenko’s guilt presumption from the beginning and was determined to prove crimes “at any cost.”

Sears remarked, “He’s attempting to help the F.B.I., and now they’re indicting him for it.”

FBI And Russian Links

The F.B.I. did not launch the investigation based on the dossier, and the special counsel’s final report did not reference anything in it as proof. Instead, Trump and his supporters have wrongly attempted to link the dossier with the official investigation into the former president’s links to Russia.

When requesting permission to wiretap the former Trump campaign aide, the F.B.I. cited a number of allegations in the dossier. The agency continued to do so after speaking with Danchenko without informing a surveillance court that there was cause to question the veracity of the dossier, according to an inspector general’s probe.

The Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign indirectly funded the dossier, which was political opposition research. They paid a law firm, which in turn paid a research agency. Which in turn outsourced to a company operated by former British spy Christopher Steele. To inquire about Trump’s business links in Russia, Steele engaged Danchenko to contact people in Europe and Russia.

Danchenko spread reports that Trump’s campaign was working with Russia and that Russia possessed a recording of Trump engaging in prostitution in a Moscow hotel. However, Danchenko claimed in an F.B.I. interview that he had first seen the dossier when BuzzFeed made it public and that Steele had inflated his claims, passing off rumors as truth.

Danchenko was hired by the F.B.I. as a confidential source, and he revealed how he had learned about the rumors. The prosecution has demonstrated that the bureau believed his network of contacts beneficial for identifying Russian influence efforts in the United States. Despite the fact that he did not give information to support the dossier.

Lies

However, Durham accused Danchenko of lying to the FBI about two of his sources for the allegations in the dossier in November 2021.

Although Dolan had emailed him details regarding office politics in the Trump campaign that were mentioned in the dossier. The special counsel claimed he had lied when he claimed he never “spoke” to Charles Dolan. A Democratic lobbyist, about anything in the dossier.

The attorney also charged Danchenko with lying four times to the F.B.I. by repeatedly asserting that he thought Sergei Millian. A former leader of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce. Which was most likely the caller who offered information without identifying himself.

The judge presiding over the case dismissed much of the evidence that Durham had sought to present. This included the alleged blackmail recording, so the trial, which started last week, was done far sooner than expected.

Throughout the trial, Durham experienced additional difficulties. In their testimony. Two government witnesses — both F.B.I. agents — appeared to weaken the prosecution’s case. Among other things claiming that since it was an email. Whatever Danchenko had said about not having “spoken” to Dolan about the Trump campaign office politics was “actually factual.”

Accusations

Judge Anthony Trenga dropped the accusation against Dolan on Friday. He proceeded before it could be heard by the jury, stating that Durham had not provided enough proof.

The F.B.I. was informed by Danchenko that he had gotten that call in late July 2016. He planned to meet the individual in New York at that time. According to Danchenko, that person did not arrive.

The defense argued that the conversation could have taken place using an app. The prosecution emphasized that traditional phone records did not reveal any evidence of such a call.

An F.B.I. agent later testified that it was fair for an email to exclude such a reference if he felt the caller was seeking anonymity. The prosecution also cited an email Danchenko had written to Millian that made no mention of an earlier call or missed appointment.

Written By Dylan Santoyo

Sources

The New York Times: Acquittal of Russia Analyst Deals Another Blow to Trump-Era Prosecutor

BBC: Trump-Russia Steele dossier source acquitted of lying to FBI

NBC: Analyst who provided Trump-Russia dossier information acquitted of lying to FBI

Top and Featured Image Courtesy of flowcomm’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

Inset Image Courtesy of flowcomm’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License