Durham: The FBI Had Danchenko on Payroll as An Informant During the Russian Collusion Investigation

Yesterday, a filing by Special Counsel John Durham revealed that Igor Danchenko, who worked as a key contributor to the discredited Steele dossier funded by the Clinton campaign, was later put on the FBI payroll as an informant. The disclosure rocked Washington and raised additional questions of the FBI’s eagerness to pursue any allegations against Donald Trump despite being warned that the dossier appeared to be a vehicle for Russian disinformation.

Danchenko is facing five counts of lying to the bureau during that relationship. His trial is scheduled for next month in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

The filing states that “In March 2017, the FBI signed the defendant up as a paid confidential human source of the FBI. The FBI terminated its source relationship with the defendant in October 2020.”

The news shocked many of us who have closely followed the Russian collusion controversy for years. The FBI showed a zeal to investigate Trump and his campaign that seemed to border on the blind obsessive. It was not simply with the Steele dossier. On the baseless Alfa Bank allegations (also pushed by Clinton campaign through friends at the FBI)  the supervisory agent for the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe, Joe Pientka, sent a note to FBI special agent Curtis Heide, stating: “People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server.” Pientka then messaged Heide: “Did you guys open a case? Reach out and put tools on?”That description of the apparent eagerness of then-FBI Director James Comey and others only magnifies concern over the bureau’s alleged bias or predisposition on the Trump investigation. It was the same eagerness that led the FBI to pursue the Russian investigation for years despite being warned early by American intelligence that the Steele dossier contained not just unsupported allegations but possible Russian disinformation.

Indeed, Danchenko’s possible connections to Russian intelligence have been raised as a matter of concern. The filing states “During his January 2017 interview with the FBI, the defendant initially denied having any contact with Russian intelligence or security services but later — as noted by the agents, contradicted himself and stated that he had contact with two individuals who he believed to be connected to those services.”

What is particularly concerning is that the FBI also had former British spy Christopher Steele, on its payroll. Steele then assembled his dossier under the funding of the Clinton campaign which repeatedly denied such funding to the media. This money was funneled through the law firm of Perkins Coie and the campaign’s general counsel, Marc Elias. (The Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign for violating election rules in hiding that funding).

So the FBI cut off Steele as a paid source after he allegedly worked with the media to spread these unproven claims. It then turned around and hired his principle source for the dossier.

The filing also states that Danchenko discussed an interest in obtaining classified information for possible sale to the Russians.

“As has been publicly reported, the defendant was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011. In late 2008, while the defendant was employed by a prominent think tank in Washington, D.C., the defendant engaged two fellow employees about whether one of the employees might be willing or able in the future to provide classified information in exchange for money.

According to one employee (‘Employee-1’), the defendant believed that he (Employee-1) might be in a position to enter the incoming Obama administration and have access to classified information. During this exchange, the defendant informed Employee-1 that he had access to people who would be willing to pay money in exchange for classified information. Employee-1 passed this information to a U.S. government contact, and the information was subsequently passed to the FBI.

Based on this information, the FBI initiated a ‘preliminary investigation’ into the defendant. The FBI converted its investigation into a ‘full investigation’ after learning that the defendant (1) had been identified as an associate of two FBI counterintelligence subjects and (2) had previous contact with the Russian Embassy and known Russian intelligence officers.”

The “prominent think tank” appears to be the Brookings Institution.  I have previously written about the prominent role of Brookings in spreading the Russian collusion claims and hiring an array of people who played critical roles in these investigations. That also included former FBI general counsel James Baker.  For some, it seemed like not just friends but “friends with benefits.” It seems that everyone in this scandal was six degrees from Brookings.


313 thoughts on “Durham: The FBI Had Danchenko on Payroll as An Informant During the Russian Collusion Investigation”

  1. “And I hate to break it to you but there are tremendous rows in politics every single day. Guaranteed there’s a phone call or two today between Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Shumer over his predicting loudly in an Italian restaurant there’s a 60% chance R’s win the House.”
    So what ? Why should I care about personal spats between pelose and schumer ?

    At the moment there is a 99% chance the GOP takes the house and atleast a 60% chance the take the Senate. RCP has the GOP at +2 in the Senate.

    “The fact that the only thing R’s are good at is talking trash about D’s.”
    Republicans are not good at that. Fortunately Democrats are very good at failing.

    “They can’t even properly back veterans or put a cap on insulin prices these days.”
    Right, Republicans should get behind incredibly stupid ideas.

    One of the near universally accepted principles of economics is that price controls do not work.
    So by all means lets push price controls.

    “My god. We’re a country of morons. So you’re in good company.”
    I am in your company.

  2. “You don’t KNOW anything about Danchenko.”
    not an argument.
    Something specific that you beleive I am wrong about ?

    It is near certain that I am wrong in some way about Danchenko.
    The way we establish that and move towards truth is via discussion and argument.

  3. OT: A smile by those who support America and rage by those who don’t.

    DeSantis sent 50 illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard. More immigrants to follow.

    1. The strategy of border governors sending illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities is Brilliant.

      Part of what the left hates about Trump is that he read “Rules for Radicals” and follows THEIR playbook.

      DeSantis and Abbot are doing the same.

      One of alynsky’s rules is that a tactic should be effective and fun.
      Even effective tactics fail if they are not fun, because supporters lose interest over time.

      Exporting illegal immigrants to other states is brilliant. Republicans get pleasure from watching those on the left have to deal with the problems they have created for others.

      Send them ALL to martha’s vinyard. 10’s of thousands.

      1. John Say: “Exporting illegal immigrants to other states is brilliant…Send them ALL to martha’s vinyard. 10’s of thousands.”

        “The Other ET” twitter feed: “Transporting immigrants from blue states to red states = fine. Transporting immigrants from red states to blue states = literally human trafficking.”


        1. “The Other ET” twitter feed: “Transporting immigrants from blue states to red states = fine. Transporting immigrants from red states to blue states = literally human trafficking.”

          Gavin Newsom actually wants the DOJ to look at it as kidnapping. So sanctuary cities and states, for illegal immigrants, are all in on opening the border to every imaginable illegal activity, but the NIMBY rule should apply. Ah, the Hotel California rule: they can check out any time they want, but they can never leave.

          1. Indeed. I watched an interview with someone on Martha’s Vineyard yesterday. “We don’t have the resources or facilities to take care of these people”, and I’m thinking to myself how can that be? Every resident on the island has how many more times the means and resources to live there compared to the new arrivals, but not enough left over to take in a single refugee or family…the people residents SAY should be helped because they’re less fortunate. Really? No spare room in Obama’s house or room on your own front lawn until they find enough work on the island to buy property there? Come on, man! The word “hypocrites” just doesn’t cut it any longer.

            1. RE:”Indeed. I watched an interview with someone on Martha’s Vineyard yesterday..” I offer you the theme underlying the motion picture ‘Elysium’ as food for thought.

              1. Quite the dystopian future portrayed in that film, for sure, Doc. Not unlike this episode of Star Trek TNG:


                Granted, both are meant to be science fiction, but it seems Leftists are seeing these, like “1984”, only as, “OOOH, THAT’S A GREAT IDEA!” They’ve either forgotten or were never taught how and why the French and American Revolutions ever happened and why. Today they are in simplest terms, ungrateful beneficiaries of our ancestor’s efforts.

                1. RE :”They’ve either forgotten or were never taught how and why ” More like they have been and were expecting that the result would be a classless society. However, Orwell reminded us that history has shown that these aspirations evolve into the ‘some are more equal than others’ variation.

  4. Seriously. How do we make this matter anymore? it is crucially important and 75% of us just don’t care so long as our wifi still works. I’m not being facetious or cynical; the few have likely always carried the many, but what do we do? There is an absolute stranglehold by the left on our gears of justice at present, and shaking off fleas is far easier. There are machinations to make that permanent. Good luck changing diddly squat if one party is in full control of everything, all the time, into perpetuity. Nancy Pelosi is one of the few people in this country I would describe as truly, irredeemably, vile and utterly toxic (she makes Trump, whom I do not favor, look like a saint, at least in government); what do we do when her party owns pretty much everything other than vote, and hope that our votes actually matter? The Founders aren’t spinning in their graves, they are on the verge of literally rising from the dead.

  5. OT: Let’s see if the Democrats of Michigan have any concern for their own safety or the lives of their children.

    Michigan GOP governor nominee Tudor Dixon unveils $1 billion plan to help police
    “If we cannot keep our communities safe, we cannot keep people here,” Dixon said.


      1. Bob, he can’t; he’s incoherent and worthy of being ignored.

        He can’t even process the fact that the President must enjoy higher and greater citizenship status than Congressmen and Senators. He can’t grasp that the constitutional requirement of “natural born citizen” for the higher office of president is quantitatively greater, and that the constitutional requirement of “citizen” for the lower offices of congress and senate is quantitatively lesser. He can’t assimilate the fact that being born in the country makes one a “citizen,” while being born in the country of parents who are citizens makes one a “natural born citizen.” He can’t understand that dictionaries define words, and that people and constitutions deploy words sans definitions. He can’t reference the clear definition of “natural born citizen” in the legal text and reference of the era, the Law of Nations, 1758, to increase his deficient vocabulary and facilitate his comprehension.

        1. George, you are tolerable when telling the truth, but not when you lie. I recognize the difference in citizenship status for members of Congress and the President, but note you have problems defining your argument that I appreciated yet found lacking due to lack of details and an obsession regarding things not relevant.

          I told you that “Law of Nations” was a point to be considered and even added Scalia’s statement, which added substance to your argument, but you failed to see it through the haze of anger at being asked for more proof, and less fluff.

          Your argument here is shooting yourself in the foot, but apparently, that is common because I note you are wearing steel boots.

          1. You agreed with the ludicrous O.J. Simpson verdict too.


            Kamala Harris will NEVER be eligible to be U.S. president.

            Kamala Harris’ parents were foreign citizens at the time of her birth.

            – The requirement of “natural born citizen” for the office of president is quantitatively and demonstrably different and greater than the requirement of “citizen” for the office of congress and senate.

            – A mere “citizen” could only have been President at the time of the adoption of the Constitution – not after.

            – The U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, requires the President to be a “natural born citizen,” which, by definition in the Law of Nations, requires “parents who are citizens” at the time of birth of the candidate and that he be “…born of a father who is a citizen;…”

            – Ben Franklin thanked Charles Dumas for copies of the Law of Nations which “…has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting,…”

            – “The importance of The Law of Nations, therefore, resides both in its systematic derivation of international law from natural law and in its compelling synthesis of the modern discourse of natural jurisprudence with the even newer language of political economy. The features help to explain the continuing appeal of this text well into the nineteenth century among politicians, international lawyers and political theorists of every complexion.” – Law of Nations Editors Bela Kapossy and Richard Whatmore.

            – The Jay/Washington letter of July, 1787, raised the presidential requirement from citizen to “natural born citizen” to place a “strong check” against foreign allegiances by the commander-in-chief.

            – Every American President before Obama had two parents who were American citizens.

            – The Constitution is not a dictionary and does not define esoteric words or phrases, while the Law of Nations, 1758, does.

            – The Law of Nations is referenced in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10, of the U.S. Constitution: “To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;…”

            Law of Nations, Vattel, 1758
            Book 1, Ch. 19
            § 212. Citizens and natives.

            “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

            Ben Franklin letter December 9, 1775, thanking Charles Dumas for 3 copies of the Law of Nations:

            “…I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly that copy, which I kept, (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed,) has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author…”

            To George Washington from John Jay, 25 July 1787
            From John Jay
            New York 25 July 1787

            Dear Sir

            I was this morning honored with your Excellency’s Favor of the 22d
            Inst: & immediately delivered the Letter it enclosed to Commodore
            Jones, who being detained by Business, did not go in the french Packet,
            which sailed Yesterday.

            Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to
            provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the
            administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief
            of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolved on, any but a natural born Citizen.
            Mrs Jay is obliged by your attention, and assures You of her perfect
            Esteem & Regard—with similar Sentiments the most cordial and sincere

            I remain Dear Sir Your faithful Friend & Servt

            John Jay

            1. Please note the comprehensive and irrefutable, factual rebuttal sans the only weapon available to the immutably unremarkable S. Meyer, ad hominem.

              1. Unless you think “Your argument here is shooting yourself in the foot, but apparently, that is common because I note you are wearing steel boots..” is an ad hominem, I think it is you that is doing so. But, that is OK because the question you raised is interesting as I noted in the way I responded.

            2. “You agreed with the ludicrous O.J. Simpson verdict too.”

              Making up stories won’t get you anywhere, George. Neither will repeating yourself.

              I suggest you reread what I wrote and look at the portions that had agreement with what you were proposing.

              1. You back an agreeable candidate who holds your positions; you disregard the law and precedent of previous presidents, making him ineligible.

                You disagree with every president prior to Obama who made a point of having two parents who were citizens at the time the candidate was born.

                You are the odd man out.

                “The proof is in the pudding,” as they say, for those who unintelligibly reject the preponderance of irrefutable evidence that proves the argument beyond a shadow of a doubt.

                1. George, you are faulting the wrong person. I am not happy with the histories of some candidates, so I have to go with the preponderance of the evidence. I count on those more knowledgeable on the subject to provide more substantial proof. Maybe they must try harder because the evidence presented to date is lacking.

        2. Inarguably natural born citizen is a subset of citizen.
          I do not think we disagree on that.

          Inarguably the constitution places a greater requirement on presidents than representatives.

          A citizen is someone born here or someone born elsewhere that meets the requirements of citizenship and in naturalized.

          The obvious meaning of natural born citizen is one Born here.

          I have asked you repeatedly for evidence that our founders meant something else.
          Something from the notes on the constitutional convention,
          Something on the notes from ratifying conventions in the states.
          Something from the federalist papers,

          You have produced something from “the law of nations” – which is pretty much about as anti-federalist as you can get.
          That does not mean that our founders disgreed with the propositions in it. Only that there was some law beside that we chose to impose on ourselves that they were bound to.

          Put simply you have not made the necescary argument to support your claim.

          Ranting is not argument.
          Insulting me is not argument.

          Misrepresenting what I have said is not argument.

          We have significant common ground. We do not disagree on most of your argument.
          We disagree on ONE thing. The meaning of Natural Born citizen.

          My definition is natural. IT flows from the words. It flows from what the founders would have taken as the meaning of the words.

          It is not impossible to prove me wrong. But ranting and calling me names will not do so.

          Your “law of nations” claim is a valid argument. It is NOT however sufficient or compelling.
          And the quotes you have provided have not proven that “the law of nations” says what you claim.
          You need more,

          You need more than “sound and fury signifying nothing”

        3. BTW Dictionaries do not define words.
          Dictionaries are supposed to catalog the defintions of words.

          Words are defined by use.

    1. RE: “. Let’s see if the Democrats of Michigan have any concern ……” “””The plan would also use $50 million to “eliminate backlogs and bring justice to victims of violent crime by providing additional resources to locate and lock up the violent offenders and rapists that threaten our communities,” Dixon also said””” Democrats have to fact the fact that you can’t keep the streets clean if you don’t keep the garbage in the containers provided for them.”

  6. Can we finally dispense with the illusion that any part of the federal government acts in an impartial or honest manner?

  7. (OT)

    The stock market plunged some 1,300 points. Mortgage rates are about double what they were when Biden took office. Inflation is reported at 8.3% (and in reality, is closer to 15%).

    Are we allowed yet to use the “R” word?

    1. A little perspective: Being paid and not working returning April 24 to work once per pay period. The left has no concern for the working families in this country.

      After teleworkers’ belated return to workplace, IRS pockets $80B windfall, eyes 87,000 new hires
      IRS leadership didn’t return to the office until April 24, and even then were only required to work in the office once per pay period.


    2. Talk with people in industrial construction. Stainless steel is up 400% when it is available. Argon gas to weld stainless is double, when it is available. Many farmers sat out this planting year due to triple fertilizer costs and double fuel and shipping. All of these costs will pass to the consumer and the kinks in the supply chain gum up the “just in time” manufacturing methods, which means more costs. Over 60% of funds brokers have their clients in cash, which mean the economy will slow even more. The WH policies are (and have had) creating a tsunami of detrimental consequences. There are too many to name.

      These are troubling times.

    3. Are you not yet fluent In Orwellian doublespeak? It’s the new national language. 🙂 …more like the twilight zone.

    4. I strongly suspect that the Fed is pulling its punches, That it is trying to do as much as it can to reign in inflation – while not tanking the economy
      before midterms.

      We are in a recession. It is mild at this point. At the same time we have at the very best put the brakes on inflation.
      We may have stalled it, we have not brought it down.

      I would be happy to hear that a credible means exists to bring inflation under control, aside from deliberately causing a recession. But I am not aware of one.

      The debates over whether we are in recession are pedantic tomfoolery.
      We are approaching double digit inflation. The only known way out of that is a recession.

      If we are not in recession, we are going to be,

      No one wants a recession, but the alternative is worse. We are going to have a recession. We are going to do so deliberately. Lying about that is just stupid. We are going to do so as the only known means to clear inflation.

      If govenrment manages to play games and avoid a recession right now, they are just delaying the inevitable and making it worse.

      We are going to have a recession – because we MUST.
      We are going to have a recession to pay for and purge the inflation that our bad choices have caused.

      It is important to understand that when we make choices that result in inflation, the cost we must pay is recession.

      We expect children to learn from their mistakes. We must do the same.

      Yet it is self evident from the Inflation Rampup Act and the student loan fiasco, that those in power have learned nothing.
      That they are short sighted and put their own political interests above those of the people.

      1. RE:”That they are short sighted and put their own political interests above those of the people.” Waiting on the fine print of the new railroad contract. That should have an interesting spinoff going forward.

      2. Pay attention. He sees the future, folks. He doesn’t need to comment on the Turley Blog because he is an independently wealthy billionaire having “timed” the market with his brilliant, mystical clairvoyance. So why does he? Yep. That is the question: To comment or squander his well-earned billions?

        1. Are you talking about me ? That is not clear. I am not an independently wealthy billionaire, and if that was sarcasm – sarcasm rarely reads on the internet.

          Regardless, I offered my view. That and a $1 will get you a donut.

          Obviously I do not know what the future holds. But I think my read is probably close.

          I remember praying two things when Obama was elected.

          First was that everything I knew about economics and government was wrong and that the things Obama said he was going to do would magically work.

          Is there someone here who would remain a ferverent capitalist, Libertarian, conservative, whatever, if socialism actually worked ? If it provided the greatest freedom and the highest standard of living for all of us ?

          There is not a single ideological position that I hold that is not subject to the priviso that if something else worked better, I am wrong.

          The Second prayer was that on stepping onto the shoes of the president, Obama would put the interests of the country above his ideology and do what was best, not what fit his ideology.

          Neither prayer was answered.

          Today, right now – I would be ecstatic if there was a solution to near double digit inflation that worked and was less painful than a recession. But Volker proved that worked, and I am unaware of anything else in the Fed’s quiver.

          I find the Biden administrations denial that we are in recession almost hillarious. They are litterally saying “No No we are NOT doing the correct thing to fight inflation, we are deliberately trying to screw up”.

          None of us wants a recession. But protracted high inflation is much worse.

          One way or the other we are swallowing the recession pill. Sooner is better than later.

          We may have a choice about when. We do not have a choice about whether.

          I would be very happy to be wrong. I think all of us would.

      3. Sam, he can’t prognosticate with Nostradamus; he’s incoherent and worthy of being ignored.

        He can’t even process the fact that the President must enjoy higher and greater citizenship status than Congressmen and Senators. He can’t grasp that the constitutional requirement of “natural born citizen” for the higher office of president is quantitatively greater, and that the constitutional requirement of “citizen” for the lower offices of congress and senate is quantitatively lesser. He can’t assimilate the fact that being born in the country makes one a “citizen,” while being born in the country of parents who are citizens makes one a “natural born citizen.” He can’t understand that dictionaries define words, and that people and constitutions deploy words sans definitions. He can’t reference the clear definition of “natural born citizen” in the legal text and reference of the era, the Law of Nations, 1758, to increase his deficient vocabulary and facilitate his comprehension.

        1. George – Please show me where I am wrong. Tell me there is a magic wand that the Fed can wave and painlessly make inflation go away.

          I want to be wrong.

        2. We have been over the NBC thing multiple times.
          You say Dictionaries define words – sorry use defines words, dictionaries catalog the definitions.

          Regardless, do you have a dictionary that defines NBC as you claim ? Say one from the late 1700’s ?
          You have cited the law of nations – I agree with you that some of our founders might have been familiar with it.
          But you have not cited how it proves your case. Even if you did a single late 1700’s reference unassociates with the drafting and ratification is not enough to treat NBC as a term of art understood by nearly all rather than its plain language meaning.

          The arguments you claim I do not accept – I agree with. The requirements for congressmen are less than president.
          The president must be born a US citizen(or be over 250 years old). No other office requires that.
          Nowhere is there a requirement regarding the presidents parents. You claim that is embedded in NBC – there is nothing in the definition of the words that says or implies anything about the parents.

          I do not have a problem with requiring the presidents persons to be citizens to – if you want that amend the constitution.

          But just like the left – you can not write in something that is not there because you want it.
          And if you wish to argue that is what our founders meant – great – PROVE IT.

          Dobbs was decided by looking to whether Abortion was viewed as a right in the later 1700’s.
          The court did not look at ONE state or one law, or one dictionary.
          Show me where NBC meant something about the parents from the same period.
          Make the case with the notes of the framers, the federalist papers, the ratification conventions in each state.
          If you can not do it with that – do so with LOTS of CLEAR historical references – not one.

          I do not accept your claim – because it is not the ordinary meaning of the words – now or then.
          You have not established it as an accepted term of art from the time.
          In fact you have not established it at all – I can not find your claim in the portions of the law of nations you cite.

          I have no problem beleiving that our founders COULD have meant as you claim. But if they did they did not leave evidence of that.

          1. You back an agreeable candidate who holds your positions; you disregard the law and precedent of previous presidents, making him ineligible.

            You disagree with every president prior to Obama who made a point of having two parents who were citizens at the time the candidate was born.

            You are the odd man out.

            “The proof is in the pudding,” as they say, for those who unintelligibly reject the preponderance of irrefutable evidence that proves the argument beyond a shadow of a doubt.

            1. Jefferson’s mother was born in England.
              Andrew Jackson’s parents were born in Ireland. Jackson is the only president with no american parents.

              Buchannon was born after the ratification of the Constitution.
              James Buchannon’s father was born in Scotland.
              Chester Arthur’s father was born in Ireland.
              Wilson’s mother was born in England
              Herbert Hoover’s mother was born in Canada.
              Donald Trump’s mother was born in Scottland.
              Trump is also the first president with an ancestor that came through Ellis island.

            2. I have said nothing about who I backed – nor is it relevant.

              You say I have disregarded law – but have provided no law – though this would be a constitutional matter regardless, You can not change the requirements for federal public office from those in the constitution.
              And you do not have what you want in the constitution.

              “Every president made a point of having two parents who were born citizens” ? Really ?
              People do not get to chose there parents.

              You are correct that prior tradition has bearing – with respect to how we understand the constitution.
              But that has to be a real tradition, not an accident, or an artifact of unrelated matters.
              In nearly all elections the candidate with the shortest name wins – is that legally binding ?

              We have had over 50 presidential elections – each with atleast 4 general election candidates subject to the NBC requirement, and Each with far more primary candidates – are you saying that NONE of those in 250+ years has had parents who were not born citizens ? I have not checked every one, But I highly doubt you have either.
              Donald Trump has incorrectly claimed his father was born in germany many times.

              Prior to Obama was there a challenge to a candidate based on YOUR definition of NBC – particularly an early 19th century challenge ?

              We have had an uninterruped tradition of white presidents – does that mean Obama could not be president because of the racial tradition ?

  8. “. . . pursue any allegations against Donald Trump despite being warned that the dossier appeared to be a vehicle for Russian disinformation . . .” (JT)

    So it turns out the Left and the MSM were right. There was Russia collusion to meddle with an election. Their fingers were just pointed in the wrong direction.

  9. Diabolical corruption in the FBLie & the DOINjustice. “TRUTH will ultimately prevail where pains are taken to bring it to light”-Geo. Washington.IF the truth is not revealed about this corruption, this country will be destroyed.

  10. Professor Turley’s statement “six degrees of separation from Brookings Institute” was I suggest not just humorous. Rather it was an arrow carefully aimed at Clintonite Strobe Talbott, Dep Sec State 1993-2001 then head of the Brookings Institute 2002-Nov 2017.

    1. Mac, you are on the right track! [1]

      1. The “six degrees of separation” (“six handshake rule”) concept was introduced by Hungarian playwright Frigyes Karinthy in 1929 and popularized by John Guare’s off-Broadway production, premiered in 1990.
      2. Professor Turley also quoted “friends with benefits” which refers to the potential of coaliition building and distribution of information. It’s also a romantic comedy (2011) starring Justin Timberlake & Mila Kunis.
      3. Igor Danchenko and Fiona Hill [2] worked at Brookings and published “One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? The Realities of a Rising China and Implications for Russia’s Energy Ambitions” in 2010. At that time, Hill introduced Danchenko to Christopher Steele (and Charles Dolan, Jr, an elusive ally of the Clintons).
      4. On 9/14/16, Steele (Fusion GPS) provided information to Strobe Talbott, who was not only Brookings President at this time but also chair of the U.S. State Department’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board since 11/09, a post he held through Secretary Kerry’s tenure. Jonathan Winer, Steele’s point man within the State Departement, shared “Cody Shearer” (Talbott’s brother-in-law), memos with Steele who provided them to FBI.
      5. Then Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who now work at Brookings, Winer & Talbott invited Steele for a meeting to discuss the dossier research.

      [1] https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/brookings-think-tank-durham-investigation-jonathan-turley
      [2] Then President Trump appointed Hill as senior director for European and Russian affairs on his National Security Council staff, a post she holds until 7/15/19. She was a key witness in 1st Trump impeachement.

      1. RE:”Mac, you are on the right track! ” Now there’s a flow sheet worth encouraging the NY Post to publish. Worthy of the title: “All the Devils Are Here”. The self-righteous Fiona Hill in particular.

        1. NYP covered, who else did?

          1. It’s all recycled and well known.
          2. Best coverage come from lawyer, writer, and researcher “Techno_Fog” (twitter; HP: technofog.substack.com)
          3. Judge Anthony Trenga set up a hearing at Eastern District Court, Alexandria, VA on 10/12/22. Sergej Millian is not expected to testify & Igor Danchenko is anticipated to say that he was under the impression the person he spoke on the phone was Sergej Millian.
          4. The Lawsuit Alfa Bank v Fusion GPS presided by Senior Judge Richard Leon, DC is ongoing [1]
          5. In 2020 UK Justice Sir Mark Warby ruled that Steele “failed to take reasonable steps” to verify the (false) allegations [2].

          [1] https://x22report.com/fusion-gps-gets-caught-red-handed-hiding-key-emails-about-its-work-in-the-alfa-bank-hoax/
          [2] https://thefederalist.com/2020/07/10/christopher-steele-court-case-exposes-shady-new-spygate-dirt/

          1. RE:”It’s all recycled and well known..” When I see what you’ve written covered by the likes of MSNBC and CNN and others of their ilk, I’ll be satisfied that the message has gone to the media and thereafter to the masses. Absent that, members of austere groups such as this one do not public opinion persuade, nor the electorate make up.

            1. Then Senator John McCain (R-AZ) at a Townhall Meeting in Lakeville, MN on 10/11/08: “He is a Decent Family Man.”


              Shortly after Barack Obama took office, “Tea Party Movement” was born [1]: A “Nationwide Chicago Tea Party” protest was coordinated across more than 40 different cities for 2/27/09: Sarah Palin was the symbolic leader, Ron Paul (Campaign for Liberty), Michelle Bachmann (formed and chaired “Tea Party Caucus”), Tom Price, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Tim Scott, Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson, and Jeff Sessions among many others [2].

              Tea Party Movement played an important role during ’16 Presidential campaigns: On 8/29/15, National Federation of Republican Assemblies, which describes itself as “a grassroots movement to take back the Republican Party for the vast and disenfranchised majority of its members.”, organized a conference in Nashville, TN: “I love the tea party!” Donald Trump told the crowd during his meandering, hourlong speech: “The tea party people are incredible people. These are people that work hard and they love the country”

              From that day, “Tea Party Movement” had a Leader but was successfully transformed to “Make American Great Again” (MAGA) movement. With the Primaries in full swing, after Trump emerged as front runner, “The Never Trump Movement” started, culminated with Mitt Romney’s [3] Anti Trump Speech on 3/3/16:


              It goes without saying that Donald Trump is not only very strong on border control but also connects to electorate [4]. To a much lesser extant “economic security is national security” and his national economic policy Trump campaigned on it (and on tariff tool). Almost every American feels the consequences through gasoline prices, energy prices, employment, wage rates and the expenses within their everyday lives.

              On 11/8/16, GOP won alle three major elections: The Presidency (304-227), the Senate (52-48), and the House (241-194). What did GOP gain? The so called “conservative establishment” does not only like Trump but also MAGA voters. For me, this is more heartbroken than a biased press.

              [1] Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX # 23) will disagree and claim that it emerged on 12/16/07, when his Presidential bid supporters held a 24-hour record breaking, “money bomb” fundraising event on the Boston Tea Party’s 234th anniversary.
              [2] Not to forget Glenn Beck until Fox News banned him from attending events.
              [3] On 11/30/16, the former MA Governor who had dinner with then President elect found warm words: “He won the general election and he continues with a message of inclusion and bringing people together, and his vision is something which obviously connected with the American people in a very powerful way.” Noting the appointments Trump has made to fill key cabinet positions for his administration and his desire for greater unity among Americans, Romney said that “all of those things combined give me increasing hope that President-elect Trump is the very man who can lead us” to a better future. As Trump supporters would feel “betrayed” (Kelllyanne Conway) Romney wasn’t picked for Secretary of State.
              {4] AZ formidable gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake should be watched closely.

              1. “What did GOP gain (in 2017)? The so called “conservative establishment” does not only like Trump but also MAGA voters. For me, this is more heartbroken than a biased press.

                Exactly right. RINOs (they know who they are) and the “conservative establishment” [(CINO?) – they know who they are, too] who cheer them on, had then and for the most part still have, little resemblance and values of the people who elect them into office. Nearly all of them in BOTH groups were completely caught off-guard when a successful, brash, playboy businessman from New York City who talked like the average citizen you’d meet on the streets of NYC, beat them at their own game (politics). He did so BECAUSE the two former groups could not comprehend how ‘business as usual’ in the Beltway being viewed as All for One (us) and None for All (flyover country filled to the brim with MAGA voters) was, and still is, a ‘bad thing’, policy-wise.

                1. It’s well documented hat during President Biden’s tenure 4.9 million people, the equivalent of the entire population of Ireland, improper entered our country. That leads to several questions, such as

                  * how could that happen though Art 4 Sec 4 of our Constitution is in play and government established DHS (lead by Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas), CBP to provide border security, immigration, customs, among many others and DOJ (lead by AG Merrick Garland) to uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe (in ’21, fentanyl, with a high profit margin) accounted for most drug overdose death), and to protect civil rights?
                  * where did they cross our border?
                  * what did the government do last 19 months to keep our country safe?

                  Did our RINOs/CINOs asked these questions? They have a seldom imagination about democracy: We choose tha candidates for election. And if the electorate vote for others, the blame goes to “quality of candidates” (and endorcement of # 45).

                  1. RE:”* how could that happen though Art 4 Sec 4 of our Constitution is in play ” When the goal is to build a sympathetic political base to assure a one-party government for the foreseeable future, the only thing in play is the ball that’s being hit out of the park to score the win. It’s time to unwoke and smell the burnt coffee!!

  11. there is no arguing with,…no red pilling, no redemption for any Trump Derangement syndrome victim, they don’t believe things on facts but rather faith, like a religion, they don’t need tangible proof anymore, like a religion their belief is on faith and their TDS .

  12. But drooling, dumbed down, lobotomized lemming Zombie cult member Democrats still believe in Russian Collusion and dismiss out of hand that the Government worked with the Hillary Campanian and spied on Trump and set him up , knowing the WHOLE time it was a ruse, fake !!
    Democrat sheep STILL believe this, that’s the biggest problem in America, no shared reality.

    1. What you say is correct, But the biggest problem is not with democrats per se.
      But with DOJ and FBI and the SC.
      These people used the power of govenrment to conduce and unconstitutional investigation, that violated lots of peoples civil rights, based on a collection of KNOWN hoaxes

      Sussman, and the Clinton organization would be criminally liable – if they sold a lie to the FBI/DOJ and the DOJ/FBI actually beleived it.

      Sussman, Danchenko and even Durham have done an excellent job of proving that DOJ and FBI knew that all of this was a hoax. That means when they subsequently used it to start an investigation and to get warrants, subpeona’s, surveil, … they acting outside the constitution and law and that they KNEW it.
      That is criminal.

      That is what Nixon WANTED from the IRS and FBI but never got.

  13. Blind obsession! You were surprised? Of course the FBI knew he was lying like they knew Susman was lying too. The deference given by you and other DC insiders to the FBI/DOJ is absurd and, frankly, insulting to your readers. Come on, man! Get real!

  14. What he is missing is Barr and Durham are a part pf the coverup, why did these details NOT COMRE OUT Mr. Turley long ago? Because Barr deep sixed it with an “Investigation” the same thing Muller did for 2 years. These are evil scum.

    1. Barr and Durham are disappointments.
      But they are not evil.
      They just do not grasp the enormity of the evil they are fighting.

    1. Apparently in Turleys world, the FBI can only have pro Trump paid informants. Apparently informants shouldn’t be used by law enforcement.

      1. Apparently in Turleys world, the FBI can only have pro Trump paid informants.

        Huh? Help me out here as your logic train seems to have derailed. I’m trying to figure out what combination of words and/or phrases from JT lead you to that conclusion.

    2. Honestly nothing should happen to Danchenko.
      His conduct was immoral.
      It was not illegal.

      His pleadings like those of Sussman are correct.
      The FBI knew they were lying.

      The criminality is within the FBI.

  15. This is by far the best and most comprehensive account of the six year effort to target Trump and anyone within six degrees of separation of him. It’s lengthy, but worth reading and sharing.

    This sub-stack article is about the Rule of Law and why the Rule of Law should matter to you, as the fate of this great nation is now in our collective hands! Mine, yours, everyone I know, etc. And all the people you know, all the people they know, etc. Come November, we, the people, regardless of party affiliation, need to decide which fork in the road Americans will choose as a nation.

    Are you fed up with the unconstitutional, morally reprehensible and probable criminal acts (being revealed by SC Durham Investigation) committed by an entrenched group of individuals who have politically weaponized nearly the entire federal national security apparatus? Or are you satisfied with the current government and the direction the country is on? Before making that decision, I ask that you take the time to read this article and all the other free sub-stack articles so you can make an informed decision on choosing between freedom and tyranny. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

  16. Professor, did we get additional about Igor Danchenko’s paid role as FBI’s confidential human source (CHS) from 3/17 until 10/20? In part yes: The reason to keep him on the FBI payroll is to mitigate any risk he might present if he were to speak.


    A. Igor Danchenko worked as Senior Research Assistant at Brookings Center on the United States and Europe from ’05 to ’10:
    3/30/06: Presentation of “The Mystery of Vladimir Putin’s Dissertation”
    8/10/10: Paper “One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? The Realities of a Rising China and Implications for Russia’s Energy Ambitions”

    B. Marc Elias from Seattle, WA based law firm “Perkins Coie” mandated “Fusion GPS” on behalf of “Hillary for America” & “DNC” to conduct an opposition research from 4/16 to 10/16
    6/16, Fusion GPS retained Christopher Steele, a FBI CHS since ’13 and private British corporate intelligence investigator to research any Russian connections to Trump. The information he collected on the connection between Trump and Russia came from Igor Danchenko.
    0716: Then Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland publicly stated that Steele’s election reporting was provided to State Department.
    7/05/16: FBI’s Michael Gaeta, Steele’s longtime handler, traveled to London, UK and met former MI-6 agent. For this visit, the FBI sought permission from the office of Victoria Nuland, FBI’s assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.
    7/31/16: FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation known as “Crossfire Hurricane.” DoJ was informed on 8/2/16.
    9/19/16 Steele sent six reports to FBI
    9/21/16: Steele met Bruce Ohr, then Associate Deputy AG & head of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF)
    9/23/16: Yahoo News “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin”
    09/16: Various media-outlet briefings (together with Fusion GPS Boss Glenn Simpson)
    Early 10/16: Steele met with various FBI agents in an European City. He provided the name of a Russian national, who he said may have connections with a Russian energy company.
    10/16: Steele communicated with FBI many times and provided seven written reports.
    10/11/16: Steele met with Jonathan Winer & Deputy Assistant Secretary Kathleen Kavalec at State Department.
    10/19/16: Steele also forwarded to FBI “Cody Shearer Memo”, which he said he had it obtained from Winer.
    10/31/16: Mother Jones’ David Corn wrote: “A Veteran Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump.

    C. OIG Review […] of Crossfire Hurricane Investigation (12/19) [1]
    A search revealed: Christopher Steele (2,540), Peter Strzok (273), Glenn Simpson (266), Andrew McCabe (229), Bill Priestap (165), James Comey (148), Fusion GPS (141), Hillary Clinton (130), Lisa Page (96), James Baker (93), Mother Jones (48), Loretta Lynch (22), James Clapper (15), John Brennan (10).

    [1] https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

    1. 9/23/16: Yahoo News “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin”

      I just want to highlight this one particular event.

      This is the “news story” used as part of the Woods file submitted to the FISA judge getting the warrants on Carter page (btw its important to understand the warrant allows spying on Page, but also “3 hops” Page, everyone he talks to Everyone they talk to and a third hop, to all they talk to. get pretty high up into the campaign.) The source of Isikoff’s reporting was the FBI. Yep. The FBI fed lies to Isikoff. He writes a story. The FBI uses the propaganda as part of their woods file. That’s why you should not consider stories that use “sources close to the story”. Name names or its a lie.


    “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

    – Barack Obama

    “We will stop him.”

    – Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page

    “[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    – Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok

    “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”

    – Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page

    “People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”

    – Bill Priestap

    The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history. The co-conspirators are:

    Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,

    James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,

    James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,

    Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,

    Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,

    Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,

    Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,

    Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,

    Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,

    Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp, Andrew Whitney et al.

    1. Trump openly admitted to conspiring with the Russians to obtain stolen data to use to influence the 2016 election.

      Based on that fact of course no stones should be left unturned. Trump is a Russian asset and needs to be exposed.

          1. hahahhaahhaha ^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^
            this is the lunacy of the left.
            they are so batcrapcrazy with TDS they simply have lost all their faculties.

      1. He made a joke during a televised speech and a 10-year-old would have recognized that. There has never been any evidence he’s a Russian asset and all the evidence is the Russians were cultivating Clinton and sabotaging Trump. Do you recall Ms. Veselnitskaya the “Trump Tower Attorney”? She was sent by the Russians to create the appearance of collusion and the minions at Time immediately put it on the cover. Later it turned out she had met with Glenn Simpson of…Fusion GPS both before and after the meeting at the tower! Her tangled web went on to include ex-FBI chief Louis B. Freeh who repped for her Russian employers in a money laundering case settlement. If they were so pro-Trump why did no one from their orbit lift a finger to discredit the fraudulent charges against Trump?

        Time and again despite the frenzied efforts of the cabal–the establishment media and it appears, ALL the “alphabet agencies”–the Russians threw money and influence at the Clintons, not Trump.

    2. As a simple person I ask a simple question , when will John Durham turn his attention to the corrupt FBI who were the center of this crime .

      1. We can hope.
        But I doubt we will see that.

        Regardless, we know WHAT was done.
        We know WHY.
        To some extent we know WHO did it.

        It is not like there is any reason to trust the FBI or DOJ.

        Neither Barr, nor Wray, nor Garland, nor Durham seem to understand that restoring Trust in the DOJ and FBI
        requires consequences for those who betrayed the public trust.

    3. We still need to hear from Sessions. I still think they got to him by threatening his family. Look what the feds are letting the thugs get away with terrorizing the SCOTUS justices at their homes and churches.

      Also don’t forget faux journalist Michael Issikopf whose “anonymously” sourced article–the source was Steele—was used to justify the FISA warrant based on Steele as a secondary “corroborating” source.

  18. Whatever “October Surprise” do the democrats have on the schedule? A self-described ex government “remote viewer” on a late-night media program recently said that a “destructive” false flag event would occur pre-election.

    1. That’s Major Ed Dames who has been predicting a solar flare “kill shot” since Art Bell in the 90s. There was in fact one of these in 1859. A Presidential Commission recommended spending $20 Billion to harden the electrical grid against EMP attack which would accomplish protection against a natural event too http://www.empcommission.org/ CoastAM host George Noory has been alone in highlighting this in the media. A caller claiming to be connected to a Senator’s family said all of Official DC has been briefed but they don’t care as they have access to special underground survival shelters. For sure these things were built to survive a nuclear attack.
      Dames did predict the North Korean first nuke test and the “Asian Contagion” financial crisis in 1997.

Comments are closed.