Lawyer: ‘PR Executive 1’ in Durham Indictment Is Former Democratic Party Campaigner:
Read Full Article: https://url.americanpatriotsforum.com/DAFjW2
4 Year Delta DURHAM:
HumaFoundationsInstitutesSteel DossierMSMMockingbirdGlobalAll roads leads to [HRC] Hillary Rodham Clinton.
18 U.S. Code 2381 – Treason18 U.S. Code 2382 – Misprision Of Treason18 U.S. Code 2383 – Rebellion Or Insurrection18 U.S. Code 2384 – Seditious Conspiracy18 U.S. Code 2385 – Advocating Overthrow Of Government Crimes against humanityIGOR Y. DANCHENKO, Defendant Court Record No. I:21-CR-245 FILED IN OPEN COURT CLERK U.S. DIS1HICT COURT ALEXANDRIA.VIRGINIA INDICTMENT
The Grand Jury Charges that:
1. On or about July 31, 2016, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) opened an investigation known as “Crossfire Hurricane” into whether individuals associated with the Donald J. Trump presidential campaign (the “Trump Campaign”) were coordinating activities with the Russian government.
2. Beginning in or about July 2016 and continuing through December 2016, the FBI began receiving a series of reports from a former British government employee (“U.K. Person-1”) that contained derogatory information on then-candidate Donald J. Trump (“Trump”) concerning Trump’s purported ties to Russia (the “Company Reports”).
3. Earlier that year, a U.S.-based international law firm (“Law Firm-1”), acting as counsel to the Hillary Clinton Presidential campaign (the “Clinton Campaign”), had retained a U.S.-based investigative firm (“U.S. Investigative Firm-1”) to conduct research on Trump and his associates. In or about June 2016, U.S. Investigative Firm-1, in turn, retained U.K. Person-1, a Case 1:21-cr-00245-AJT Document 1 Filed 11/03/21 Page 1 of 39 Page ID# 1 former officer in a friendly foreign intelligence service (“Foreign Intelligence Service-1”), and his U.K.-based firm (“U.K Investigative Firm-l”), to investigate Trump’s purported ties to Russia.
4. During the U.S. presidential election season and afterwards, U.K. Person-1 and employees of U.S. Investigative Firm-l provided the Company Reports to multiple media outlets and to U.S. government personnel.
5. The Company Reports played an important role in applications that FBI personnel prepared and submitted to obtain warrants pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”) targeting a United States citizen who had been an advisor to then-candidate Trump (“Advisor-1”). In connection with the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation and the later investigation by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III, the FBI relied substantially on the Company Reports in these FISA applications to assert probable cause that Advisor-1 was a witting agent of the Russian Federation.
6. The FBI obtained a total of four court-approved FISA applications targeting Advisor-1, which authorized intrusive electronic surveillance of Advisor-1 from in or about October 2016 through in or about September 2017. Each of the FISA applications set forth the FBI’s assessment that Advisor-1 was a knowing agent of Russia and further alleged – based on the Company Reports – that Advisor-1 was part of a “well-coordinated conspiracy of co-operation” between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government.
7. Over time, the FBI attempted to investigate, vet, and analyze the Company Reports but ultimately was not able to confirm or corroborate most of their substantive allegations.
8. In the context of these efforts, the FBI learned that U.K. Person-1 relied primarily on a U.S.-based Russian national, IGOR DANCHENKO (“DANCHENKO”), the defendant herein, to collect the information that ultimately formed the core of the allegations found in the Case 1:21-cr-00245-AJT Document 1 Filed 11/03/21 Page 2 of 39 Page ID# 2 Company Reports. From in or about January 2017 through in or about November 2017, and as part of its efforts to determine the truth or falsity of specific information in the Company Reports, the FBI conducted several interviews of DANCHENKO regarding, among other things, the information that DANCHENKO had provided to U.K. Person-1 (collectively, the “Interviews”).
9. As alleged in further detail below, DANCHENKO lied to FBI agents during these Interviews.
10. First, DANCHENKO stated falsely that he had never communicated with a particular U.S.-based individual – who was a long-time participant in Democratic Party politics and was then an executive at U.S. public relations firm about any allegations contained in the Company Reports. In truth and in fact, and as DANCHENKO well knew, DANCHENKO sourced one or more specific allegations in the Company Reports anonymously to PR Executive-l.
11. PR Executive-I’s role as a contributor of information to the Company Reports was highly relevant and material to the FBI’s evaluation of those reports because
(a) PR Executive-l maintained pre-existing and ongoing relationships with numerous persons named or described in the Company Reports, including one of DANCHENKO’s Russian sub-sources (detailed below),
(b) PR Executive-l maintained historical and ongoing involvement in Democratic politics, which bore upon PR Executive-l’s reliability, motivations, and potential bias as a source of information for the Company Reports, and
(c) DANCHENKO gathered some of the information contained in the Company Reports at events in Moscow organized by PR Executive-l and others that DANCHENKO attended at PR Executive-l’s invitation.
Indeed, and as alleged below, certain allegations that DANCHENKO provided to U.K. Person-1, and which appeared in the Company Case 1:21-cr-00245-AJT Document 1 Filed 11/03/21 Page 3 of 39 PageID# 3 Reports, mirrored and/or reflected information that PR Executive-] himself also had received through his own interactions with Russian nationals.
12. Second, DANCHENKO stated falsely during the Interviews, that, in or about late July 2016, he received an anonymous phone call from an individual who DANCHENKO believed to be a particular U.S. citizen and who was then president of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce (“Chamber President-1”). DANCHENKO also falsely stated that, during this phone call, (i) the person he believed to be Chamber President-1 informed him, in part, about information that the Company Reports later described as demonstrating a well-developed “conspiracy of cooperation” between the Trump Campaign and Russian officials, and (ii) DANCHENKO and the aforementioned person agreed to meet in New York. In truth and fact, and as DANCHENKO well knew, DANCHENKO never received such a phone call or such information from any person he believed to be Chamber President-1, and DANCEHNKO never made any arrangements to meet Chamber President-1 in New York. Rather, DANCHENKO fabricated these facts regarding Chamber President-1.
13. As alleged in further detail below, all of DANCHENKO’s lies were material to the FBI because, among other reasons,
(1) the FBI’s investigation of the Trump Campaign relied in large part on the Company Reports to obtain FISA warrants on Advisor-1,
(2) the FBI ultimately devoted substantial resources attempting to investigate and corroborate the allegations contained in the Company Reports, including the reliability of DANCHENKO’s sub-sources; and
(3) the Company Reports, as well as information collected for the Reports by DANCHENKO, played a role in the FBI’s investigative decisions and in sworn representations that the FBI made to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court throughout the relevant time period.