WASHINGTON — In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.
The inquiry carried 
explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to 
consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible 
threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr.
 Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under 
Moscow’s influence.
The investigation the F.B.I. opened into Mr. Trump also had a criminal aspect, which has long been publicly known: whether his firing of Mr. Comey constituted obstruction of justice.
Agents
 and senior F.B.I. officials had grown suspicious of Mr. Trump’s ties to
 Russia during the 2016 campaign but held off on opening an 
investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were 
uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and 
magnitude. But the president’s activities before and after Mr. Comey’s 
firing in May 2017, particularly two instances
 in which Mr. Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia 
investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the 
inquiry, the people said.
The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller 
III, took over the inquiry into Mr. Trump when he was appointed, days 
after F.B.I. officials opened it. That inquiry is part of Mr. Mueller’s broader examination
 of how Russian operatives interfered in the 2016 election and whether 
any Trump associates conspired with them. It is unclear whether Mr. 
Mueller is still pursuing the counterintelligence matter, and some 
former law enforcement officials outside the investigation have 
questioned whether agents overstepped in opening it.
The
 criminal and counterintelligence elements were coupled together into 
one investigation, former law enforcement officials said in interviews 
in recent weeks, because if Mr. Trump had ousted the head of the F.B.I. 
to impede or even end the Russia investigation, that was both a possible
 crime and a national security concern. The F.B.I.’s counterintelligence
 division handles national security matters.
“Not only would 
it be an issue of obstructing an investigation, but the obstruction 
itself would hurt our ability to figure out what the Russians had done, 
and that is what would be the threat to national security,” Mr. Baker 
said in his testimony, portions of which were read to The New York 
Times. Mr. Baker did not explicitly acknowledge the existence of the 
investigation of Mr. Trump to congressional investigators.
No
 evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact 
with or took direction from Russian government officials. An F.B.I. 
spokeswoman and a spokesman for the special counsel’s office both 
declined to comment.
Rudolph W. 
Giuliani, a lawyer for the president, sought to play down the 
significance of the investigation. “The fact that it goes back a year 
and a half and nothing came of it that showed a breach of national 
security means they found nothing,” Mr. Giuliani said on Friday, though 
he acknowledged that he had no insight into the inquiry.
The
 cloud of the Russia investigation has hung over Mr. Trump since even 
before he took office, though he has long vigorously denied any illicit 
connection to Moscow. The obstruction inquiry,  revealed by The Washington Post
 a few weeks after Mr. Mueller was appointed, represented a direct 
threat that he was unable to simply brush off as an overzealous 
examination of a handful of advisers. But few details have been made 
public about the counterintelligence aspect of the investigation.
The
 decision to investigate Mr. Trump himself was an aggressive move by 
F.B.I. officials who were confronting the chaotic aftermath of the 
firing of Mr. Comey and enduring the president’s verbal assaults on the 
Russia investigation as a “witch hunt.”
A
 vigorous debate has taken shape among some former law enforcement 
officials outside the case over whether F.B.I. investigators overreacted
 in opening the counterintelligence inquiry during a tumultuous period 
at the Justice Department. Other former officials noted that those 
critics were not privy to all of the evidence and argued that sitting on
 it would have been an abdication of duty.
The F.B.I. conducts two types of inquiries,
 criminal and counterintelligence investigations. Unlike criminal 
investigations, which are typically aimed at solving a crime and can 
result in arrests and convictions, counterintelligence inquiries are 
generally fact-finding missions to understand what a foreign power is 
doing and to stop any anti-American activity, like thefts of United 
States government secrets or covert efforts to influence policy. In most
 cases, the investigations are carried out quietly, sometimes for years.
 Often, they result in no arrests.
Mr.
 Trump had caught the attention of F.B.I. counterintelligence agents 
when he called on Russia during a campaign news conference in July 2016 to hack into the emails of his opponent, Hillary Clinton. Mr. Trump had refused to criticize Russia on the campaign trail, praising President Vladimir V. Putin. And investigators had watched with alarm as the Republican Party softened its convention platform on the Ukraine crisis in a way that seemed to benefit Russia.
Other factors fueled the F.B.I.’s concerns, according to the people 
familiar with the inquiry. Christopher Steele, a former British spy who 
worked as an F.B.I. informant, had compiled memos in mid-2016
 containing unsubstantiated claims that Russian officials tried to 
obtain influence over Mr. Trump by preparing to blackmail and bribe him.
In the months before the 2016 election, the F.B.I. was also already investigating
 four of Mr. Trump’s associates over their ties to Russia. The 
constellation of events disquieted F.B.I. officials who were 
simultaneously watching as Russia’s campaign unfolded to undermine the 
presidential election by exploiting existing divisions among Americans.
“In
 the Russian Federation and in President Putin himself, you have an 
individual whose aim is to disrupt the Western alliance and whose aim is
 to make Western democracy more fractious in order to weaken our 
ability, America’s ability and the West’s ability to spread our 
democratic ideals,” Lisa Page, a former bureau lawyer, told House 
investigators in private testimony reviewed by The Times.
“That’s the goal, to make us less of a moral authority to spread democratic values,” she added. Parts of her testimony were first reported by The Epoch Times.
And when a newly inaugurated Mr. Trump sought a loyalty pledge from Mr. Comey and later asked that he end an investigation
 into the president’s national security adviser, the requests set off 
discussions among F.B.I. officials about opening an inquiry into whether
 Mr. Trump had tried to obstruct that case.
But
 law enforcement officials put off the decision to open the 
investigation until they had learned more, according to people familiar 
with their thinking. As for a counterintelligence inquiry, they 
concluded that they would need strong evidence to take the sensitive 
step of investigating the president, and they were also concerned that 
the existence of such an inquiry could be leaked to the news media, 
undermining the entire investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 
election.
After Mr. Comey was fired on May 9, 2017, two more of Mr. Trump’s actions prompted them to quickly abandon those reservations.
The first was a letter Mr. Trump wanted to send to Mr. Comey about his 
firing, but never did, in which he mentioned the Russia investigation. In the letter, Mr. Trump thanked Mr. Comey for previously telling him he was not a subject of the F.B.I.’s Russia investigation.
Even after the 
deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, wrote a more restrained 
draft of the letter and told Mr. Trump that he did not have to mention 
the Russia investigation — Mr. Comey’s poor handling of the Clinton 
email investigation would suffice as a fireable offense, he explained — 
Mr. Trump directed Mr. Rosenstein to mention the Russia investigation 
anyway.
He disregarded the 
president’s order, irritating Mr. Trump. The president ultimately added a
 reference to the Russia investigation to the note he had delivered, thanking Mr. Comey for telling him three times that he was not under investigation.
The second event that troubled investigators was an NBC News interview two days after Mr. Comey’s firing in which Mr. Trump appeared to say he had dismissed Mr. Comey because of the Russia inquiry.
“I
 was going to fire Comey knowing there was no good time to do it,” he 
said. “And in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself — I 
said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up 
story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that 
they should’ve won.”
Mr. Trump’s 
aides have said that a fuller examination of his comments demonstrates 
that he did not fire Mr. Comey to end the Russia inquiry. “I might even 
lengthen out the investigation, but I have to do the right thing for the
 American people,” Mr. Trump added. “He’s the wrong man for that 
position.”
As F.B.I. officials 
debated whether to open the investigation, some of them pushed to move 
quickly before Mr. Trump appointed a director who might slow down or 
even end their investigation into Russia’s interference. Many involved 
in the case viewed Russia as the chief threat to American democratic 
values.
“With respect to Western 
ideals and who it is and what it is we stand for as Americans, Russia 
poses the most dangerous threat to that way of life,” Ms. Page told 
investigators for a joint House Judiciary and Oversight Committee 
investigation into Moscow’s election interference.
F.B.I. officials
 viewed their decision to move quickly as validated when a comment the 
president made to visiting Russian officials in the Oval Office shortly 
after he fired Mr. Comey was revealed days later.
“I
 just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. 
Trump said, according to a document summarizing the meeting. “I faced 
great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment