Clark's Scribbles

A Special Counsel

A Special Counsel was appointed in May 2017 by acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to protect the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Russian attacks took the form of public, lawful propaganda and covert cyber warfare. The assault on our presidential election began in 2014 with preparations to exploit social media. By early 2016, Russian operatives were working to break into our computer systems. They gained access to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) computer network in mid-April 2016. A week later they broke into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) network using credential stolen from the DCCC system. (tinyurl.com/2016InterferenceTimeline)

By mid-June 2016, a cybersecurity firm hired by the DNC had identified two groups associated with Russian Intelligence as the culprits in the hack. (tinyurl.com/FastFacts2016Interference)

A Romanian blogger, identifying himself as Guccifer 2.0 claimed responsibility for the hacks and posted stolen materials as proof. Further investigation proved that “the D.N.C.’s messages [were] running through communications lines controlled by the Russian military intelligence service, called the G.R.U.” (tinyurl.com/GucciferIdentified)

On May 17, 2017, Acting AG Rosenstein and Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe briefed the Gang of Eight plus Congressman Deven Nunes chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman Nunes should not have been in the briefing because he had stepped away from the Russia investigation although he never actually recused himself. It is likely he joined the meeting because of his role as a Trump informant.

McCabe began the briefing by explaining how the FBI began its investigation into the possibility of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government in July of 2016. The investigators began with a simple question: “Which individuals associated with the campaign had had significant [recent] or historical ties to Russia?” (“The Threat” p. 245)

The break-in – the hacking of the DCCC and DNC computer systems — provided both information on a national security threat and allegations of a federal crime that justified opening the FBI investigation. (“The Threat” p. 210) The primary beneficiary of a Russian attack on the Democratic presidential campaign appeared to be the opposing campaign. The Bureau’s investigation began with four top-level members of the Trump Campaign

Foreign policy adviser Carter Page had “met with Russian foreign-intelligence officers in New York and had recently [visited] Russia.” (“The Threat” p.245)

George Papadopoulos, another foreign policy advisor, “had told a foreign diplomat” that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton and wanted “to help Trump’s campaign.” (Ibid)

“Mike Flynn, the campaign’s senior foreign policy advisor … was known to have had multiple high-level contacts with the Russian government.” He even sat next to Vladimir Putin at a gala in Moscow. (“The Threat” pp 210, 211)

Paul Manafort was a political operative who had engineered Victor Yanukovych’s successful 2010 campaign for the presidency in the Ukraine. Yanukovych was a former KGB agent and Putin associate. Manafort had strong ties to high level Ukrainian and Russian operatives. He joined the struggling Trump campaign at the end of March 2016 and took over as campaign chairman in May. During his five-month tenure with the campaign, Manafort added polling to the toolbox (Trump had previously disapproved of pollsters). It appears that polling data he shared with Russian oligarch Konstantin Kilimnik was useful in winning battleground states for Trump.  According to the New Yorker (“Why Would Paul Manafort Share Polling Data With Russia,” by Sue Halpern, January 10, 2019, tinyurl.com/TrumpPollingData) two studies showed that the data “potentially offered demographic targets for Russian bots and Propaganda.”

“In her analysis of five million paid, issue-based Facebook ads—which covered such hot-button issues as gun rights, abortion, gay rights, immigration, terrorism, and race—during a six-week period of the 2016 Presidential campaign, the University of Wisconsin professor Young Mie Kim discovered that ‘the most highly targeted states—especially Pennsylvania and Wisconsin—generally overlap with the battleground states with razor thin margins.’ These were ads placed by two hundred and twenty-eight groups, many of which were later linked to the Internet Research Agency. Kim also found that these efforts were calibrated to appeal to certain demographics. Low-income white voters, for example, were targeted with ads focusing on immigration and race.”

This investigation into Russian interference with our 2016 election and possible collusion by the Trump campaign has occasioned extreme outbursts and vicious attacks by Donald Trump. He has repeatedly characterized the investigation as a witch hunt. He publicly criticized his Attorney General Jeff Sessions for recusing himself from the investigation instead of bringing it to a quick conclusion. Sessions eventually stepped away from his cabinet post so that the President could install AG Barr who promised to protect him from the fallout.

“Trump fired [FBI Director James] Comey on May 9, 2017, a move that Comey said later was aimed at undercutting the probe.

The Trump administration said at the time of Comey’s dismissal that the president had acted on the recommendation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and No. 2 Justice Department official Rod Rosenstein.

In an interview with NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt that aired two days after the firing, Trump accused Comey of being incompetent and noted the recommendation, but also raised the issue of the Russia investigation, saying he was thinking of ‘this Russia thing’ when he fired him.” (tinyurl.com/TheRussiaThing)

“President Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved ‘great pressure’ on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.

‘I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,’ Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. ‘I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.’

Mr. Trump added, ‘I’m not under investigation.’” ( NYT May 19, 2017, tinyurl.com/FiringComeyEasedPressure)

Donald Trump has had amazing success in politics because of his ability to sell his point of view. He sets the agenda and the tone. Everyone else finds themselves in a position of pushing back against his assaults. As soon as he joined the presidential sweepstakes in June 2015, he went on the attack. He attacked war-hero rival John McCain for getting captured and imprisoned during the Vietnam War. He released Lindsey Graham’s phone number on national TV. He kept it up until he had ground his rivals to dust and steamrolled his last opponent, Senator Ted Cruz, of Texas. After the blood bath primary, those rivals either crawled off into obscurity or got in line to help create the new Conservative Ascendency under the former reality TV star.

Trump’s followers have taken up the “witch hunt” chant and adopted conspiracy theories in defense of their king.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is the one person he could neither cow nor pulverize. She still looked strong as the election approached. The dagger blow that may have tipped the election in Trump’s favor was administered by FBI director Comey when he sent a letter to Congress announcing that he was reopening the investigation into her emails eleven days before the election.

With or without that letter, Trump had a path to an Electoral College win. The road was tortuous and chances of success were slim, but victory could not be ruled out. So he came out on top. He could not have achieved that victory without a lot of help. There is no way to discount the impact of Comey’s last-minute letter. The Russian advertising blitz that ran throughout 2015 and 2016 was three-pronged: support Trump, bash Clinton and play up cracks in Democratic unity – especially by championing Bernie Sanders. When the Russians broke into the DCCC and DNC computer systems, they committed a federal crime much like the 1972 Watergate break-in. When Trump’s campaign manager handed internal polling data over to a Russian oligarch, he colluded with a foreign power to ensure that his candidate would win.

Donald Trump may not have won the Presidential election in 2016. Vladimir Putin may have engineered a victory over his arch-rival Hillary Clinton. The Russian president’s bonus for putting his own man in the highest office would be getting a Kompromat who could be manipulated to work for Russian interests.

The FBI investigation into Russian interference threatened the newly installed president in many ways. It was a personal insult. It threatened to undermine the legitimacy of his victory. It could lead to criminal charges and even convictions. So President Trump fired his FBI director to relieve the pressure. But acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein responded by appointing former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel “to pursue the Russia investigation.” (“The Threat” p. 246).

The train had left the station. When Trump was unable to stop it, he appointed an AG who could intercept the Special Counsel’s report and bury it. William Barr issued a four-page summary letter that said or implied the Trump campaign had not colluded with the Russians and that President was absolved of Obstruction of Justice charges.

That letter has not convinced enough American citizens. A cursory review of publicly available evidence suggests that the campaign probably colluded with the Russians and that the President did everything in his power to obstruct justice.

We the American people and our representatives in Congress need to have the full, complete report from the Special Counsel so that we can reach our own well-informed conclusions.