Re-interpreting the Guardian’s “British spies were first to spot Trump team’s links with Russia” in Light of Recent Claims by Larry Johnson

Submitted by veganmark on Wed, 05/08/2019 - 12:00pm

The latest essay by former CIA analyst Larry Johnson contains a blockbuster claim:

The CIA, with the knowledge of the Director of National Intelligence, worked with British counterparts starting in the summer of 2015 to collect intelligence on Republican and at least one Democrat candidate. John Brennan was probably hoping that his proactive steps to help the Hillary Clinton campaign would ensure him taking over as DNI in the new Clinton Administration. Regardless of motives, the CIA enlisted the British intelligence community to start gathering intelligence on most major Republican candidates and on Bernie Sanders. This initial phase of intelligence gathering goes beyond opposition research. The information being gathered identified the key personnel in each campaign and identified the people outside the United States receiving their calls, texts and emails. This information was turned into intelligence reports that then were passed back to the United States intel community as "liaison reporting." This was not put into normal classified channels. This intelligence was put into a SAP, i.e. a Special Access Program.

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/05/obama-spied-...

Johnson does not indicate who or what his sources are for this remarkable assertion, and prudent people can reasonably remain skeptical until further evidence emerges. However, I invite you to assume, for the sake of argument, that his claims here are true, and then take another look at a frequently cited article by Luke Harding, Stephanie Kirchgaessner, and Nick Hopkins that appeared in the Guardian on April 13th, 2017:

"British spies were first to spot Trump team’s links with Russia"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/13/british-spies-first-to-s...

Here are some key excerpts:

Britain’s spy agencies played a crucial role in alerting their counterparts in Washington to contacts between members of Donald Trump’s campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives, the Guardian has been told.

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.

Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.

----------

It is understood that GCHQ was at no point carrying out a targeted operation against Trump or his team or proactively seeking information. The alleged conversations were picked up by chance as part of routine surveillance of Russian intelligence assets. Over several months, different agencies targeting the same people began to see a pattern of connections that were flagged to intelligence officials in the US.

----------

The Guardian has been told the FBI and the CIA were slow to appreciate the extensive nature of contacts between Trump’s team and Moscow ahead of the US election. This was in part due to US law that prohibits US agencies from examining the private communications of American citizens without warrants. “They are trained not to do this,” the source stressed.

[Damn that pesky 4th Amendment!]

“It looks like the [US] agencies were asleep,” the source added. “They [the European agencies] were saying: ‘There are contacts going on between people close to Mr Trump and people we believe are Russian intelligence agents. You should be wary of this.’

“The message was: ‘Watch out. There’s something not right here.’”

According to one account, GCHQ’s then head, Robert Hannigan, passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan. The matter was deemed so sensitive it was handled at “director level”. After an initially slow start, Brennan used GCHQ information and intelligence from other partners to launch a major inter-agency investigation.

----------

One source suggested the official investigation was making progress. “They now have specific concrete and corroborative evidence of collusion,” the source said. “This is between people in the Trump campaign and agents of [Russian] influence relating to the use of hacked material.”

When I first read that report, it struck me as fantastical that the Brits were surveilling Russian intelligence operatives back in 2015 (when most assumed that Trump would not be the nominee) and just happened to notice that some of the people in touch with them were "Trump associates". As if the British spooks just routinely carried a list of “Trump associates” in their back pocket.

And the mystery deepened when Comey later testified before Congress that these Russian contacts in fact were not considered to be "Russian intelligence agents" by US intelligence.

So now we are supposed to believe that GCHQ was monitoring Russians who actually weren't "Russian intelligence agents", and just happened to notice that they had contact with "Trump associates". Yeah, right!

However, this all makes more sense if we accept Johnson’s claims. The Brits were given a list of Trump associates by Brennan, and then traced all of the contacts that these individuals had with Russians. The Brits evidently chose to characterize the Russian contacts as “suspected Russian agents”. (I suppose they were “suspected” because Trump associates had contacted them!)

This statement then emerges as a mendacious effort at cover-your-ass:

It is understood that GCHQ was at no point carrying out a targeted operation against Trump or his team or proactively seeking information. The alleged conversations were picked up by chance as part of routine surveillance of Russian intelligence assets.

Brennan’s reliance on the Brits for the surveillance of Trump associates reflects the fact that the CIA cannot legally spy on US citizens. But nothing says the Brits can’t! And then those reports could be reported back to our CIA as “liaison intelligence”. If this end-run around our 4th Amendment isn’t illegal, it certainly ought to be.

The sketchiness of the whole enterprise might explain why Robert Hannigan of GCHQ felt compelled to visit Brennan personally to deliver his findings. It just wouldn’t be smart to leave any clues that the CIA and GCHQ were colluding (oh my God, did I just type that word!) to smear any potential rival to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

And was it sheer coincidence that Robert Hannigan resigned as chief of GCHQ just as Trump was sworn into office?

Where pray tell in the Mueller Report is the info regarding the highly suspicious contacts of Trump associates with “Russian intelligence assets” described in Harding’s article? And where is that “specific concrete and corroborative evidence of collusion” that he refers to?

Hopefully Johnson and other journalists can dig up corroborative evidence for Johnson’s bold assertions regarding CIA/GCHQ “election interference”. Because Johnson’s narrative seems to make sense of some claims that previously seemed rather fantastical.

Tags:

Spygate CIA Brennan GCHQ Trump

Vote

Comments

Submitted by dkmich on Wed, 05/08/2019 - 1:21pm

I'm beginning to wonder if the right wing is right.

You can't reform it. All you can do is shrink it enough to drown in a bath tub. Right nor left have been the least bit successful however. One thing for sure, it makes me doubly happy that Hillary lost despite it all.

—

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Submitted by Roy Blakeley on Wed, 05/08/2019 - 2:03pm

Your points are well taken

and they explain a lot, as does Johnson's piece. So.......we have trans-national collusion to subvert democracy and facilitate the Clinton/Brennan-directed slow, but careful, descent into fascism. The failure resulted in another fascist (albeit a clumsy one) being elected. The frightening thing is that your explanation and Johnson's piece are not only plausible, but likely to be true. They explain, in a relatively straightforward way, a lot of odd things that defy conventional explanations.

Submitted by leveymg on Wed, 05/08/2019 - 5:29pm

I would be careful about relying on Larry Johnson as a sole

source.

How might he have known about the CIA tasking of the the Brits to spy on Trump in 2015-16? He is a former CIA officer and was Deputy Undersecretary of Counterterrorism at the State Dept. He has a network of old friends in the IC. But, he has a mixed track record in the "insider" information he has released.

On the down side, Johnson was instrumental in spreading the unproven rumor that Michelle Obama had publicly used the term "whitey" at Jeremiah Wright's Church. According to his Wiki entry:

Beginning in 2007, Johnson emerged as a strident opponent of Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.[2] His rapid swing from the left to the right earned him the enmity of former allies.[2] According to The New York Times, Johnson is "best known for spreading a hoax... in 2008 that Michelle Obama had been videotaped using a slur against Caucasians".[1] His blog, NoQuarterUSA, often criticized Obama's qualifications to be president. On May 16, 2008, Johnson posted an item entitled, "Will Barack Throw Mama From the Train?" which alleged that a tape existed of Michelle Obama "railing against 'whitey' at Jeremiah Wright's church."[13][1] Johnson claimed that Republicans were in possession of the tape and it "is being held for the fall to drop at the appropriate time." In a subsequent post, Johnson claimed that Obama's appearance had occurred when she was on a panel with Louis Farrakhan. He also explained that he himself had not seen the tape, but had spoken with "five separate sources who have spoken directly with people who have seen the tape."[14] The Obama campaign's "Fight the Smears" website denied the rumor, saying, "No such tape exists. Michelle Obama has not spoken from the pulpit at Trinity and has not used that word."[15]

No tape was ever released, nor has any other evidence emerged of Obama using the word "whitey". On October 21, 2008, Johnson said that, according to one of his sources, the McCain campaign "intervened and requested the tape not be used."[16]

On the positive side, Johnson is a member of VIPS who was highly critical of the Bush Administration's invasion of Iraq and the outing of Valerie Plame. History Commons recalls this item about Johnson:

April 2003: US Intelligence Analysts Complain about Pressure to Tie Iraq to Al-Qaeda
Edit event

Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA [officer and] deputy director of the US State Department Office of Counterterrorism, will say at a National Press Club briefing in February 2004: “By April of last year, I was beginning to pick up grumblings from friends inside the intelligence community that there had been pressure applied to analysts to come up with certain conclusions. Specifically, I was told that analysts were pressured to find an operational link between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. One analyst, in particular, told me they were repeatedly pressured by the most senior officials in the Department of Defense.” Johnson, who is also a former CIA analyst, adds: “In an e-mail exchange with another friend, I raised the possibility that ‘the Bush administration had bought into a lie.’ My friend, who works within the intelligence community, challenged me on the use of the word, ‘bought,’ and suggested instead that the Bush administration had created the lie.… I have spoken to more than two analysts who have expressed fear of retaliation if they come forward and tell what they know. We know that most of the reasons we were given for going to war were wrong.” [Bamford, 2004, pp. 333-334; Falls Church News-Press, 2/2004 Sources: Larry C. Johnson]

Entity Tags: Larry C. Johnson

Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline, Events Leading to Iraq Invasion

Of course, one should always be wary of rumors spread within the intelligence community pipelines. So many agendas, and what a tangled web they weave. But, I will agree that Johnson's Sic Semper Tyrannis article contains some interesting material. Enough of it is familiar and has been elsewhere published -- particularly athe details about pre-2016 British Intel surveillance of Trump -- that aspect of the story may well be verifiable.

Submitted by veganmark on Wed, 05/08/2019 - 5:19pm

@leveymg Larry has offered a

@leveymg Larry has offered a reasonable explanation for why he reported the "Whitey" rumor - sadly, he trusted sources within Hillary Clinton's campaign.

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/04/vindicated-a...

Hillary's 2008 campaign also memorably spread around a photo of Obama in African garb. The Whitey rumor was likewise their work.

The Deep Staters who hate Larry have done their best to tar him with the Whitey story, to discredit his past and future work. I imagine that most honest journalists have made a mistake or two in their careers by relying on bum tips. It seems to me that he is doing outstanding work lately - though the accuracy of this current claim presumably rests on the typical anonymous sources, and I don't blame those who are skeptical. But the point of my essay is to show how this claim makes intelligible things that were previously unintelligible.

source. How might he have known about the CIA tasking of the the Brits to spy on Trump in 2015-16? He is a former CIA officer and was Deputy Undersecretary of Counterterrorism at the State Dept. He has a network of old friends in the IC. But, he has a mixed track record in the "insider" information he has released. On the down side, Johnson was instrumental in spreading the unproven rumor that Michelle Obama had publicly used the term "whitey" at Jeremiah Wright's Church. According to his Wiki entry: Beginning in 2007, Johnson emerged as a strident opponent of Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.[2] His rapid swing from the left to the right earned him the enmity of former allies.[2] According to The New York Times, Johnson is "best known for spreading a hoax... in 2008 that Michelle Obama had been videotaped using a slur against Caucasians".[1] His blog, NoQuarterUSA, often criticized Obama's qualifications to be president. On May 16, 2008, Johnson posted an item entitled, "Will Barack Throw Mama From the Train?" which alleged that a tape existed of Michelle Obama "railing against 'whitey' at Jeremiah Wright's church."[13][1] Johnson claimed that Republicans were in possession of the tape and it "is being held for the fall to drop at the appropriate time." In a subsequent post, Johnson claimed that Obama's appearance had occurred when she was on a panel with Louis Farrakhan. He also explained that he himself had not seen the tape, but had spoken with "five separate sources who have spoken directly with people who have seen the tape."[14] The Obama campaign's "Fight the Smears" website denied the rumor, saying, "No such tape exists. Michelle Obama has not spoken from the pulpit at Trinity and has not used that word."[15] No tape was ever released, nor has any other evidence emerged of Obama using the word "whitey". On October 21, 2008, Johnson said that, according to one of his sources, the McCain campaign "intervened and requested the tape not be used."[16] On the positive side, Johnson is a member of VIPS who was highly critical of the Bush Administration's invasion of Iraq and the outing of Valerie Plame. History Commons recalls this item about Johnson: April 2003: US Intelligence Analysts Complain about Pressure to Tie Iraq to Al-Qaeda Edit event Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA [officer and] deputy director of the US State Department Office of Counterterrorism, will say at a National Press Club briefing in February 2004: “By April of last year, I was beginning to pick up grumblings from friends inside the intelligence community that there had been pressure applied to analysts to come up with certain conclusions. Specifically, I was told that analysts were pressured to find an operational link between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. One analyst, in particular, told me they were repeatedly pressured by the most senior officials in the Department of Defense.” Johnson, who is also a former CIA analyst, adds: “In an e-mail exchange with another friend, I raised the possibility that ‘the Bush administration had bought into a lie.’ My friend, who works within the intelligence community, challenged me on the use of the word, ‘bought,’ and suggested instead that the Bush administration had created the lie.… I have spoken to more than two analysts who have expressed fear of retaliation if they come forward and tell what they know. We know that most of the reasons we were given for going to war were wrong.” [Bamford, 2004, pp. 333-334; Falls Church News-Press, 2/2004 Sources: Larry C. Johnson] Entity Tags: Larry C. Johnson Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline, Events Leading to Iraq Invasion Of course, one should always be wary of rumors spread within the intelligence community pipelines. So many agendas, and what a tangled web they weave. But, I will agree that Johnson's Sic Semper Tyrannis article contains some interesting material. Enough of it is familiar and has been elsewhere published -- particularly athe details about pre-2016 British Intel surveillance of Trump -- that aspect of the story may well be verifiable.

—

Mark F. McCarty

Submitted by leveymg on Wed, 05/08/2019 - 9:55pm

I agree, as a whole, Johnson is credible, article is valuable.

@veganmark I think Johnson makes some excellent points and does a good job of showing what is known about pre-2016 surveillance of and penetration into Trump's circle. The following paragraphs are particularly notable in connecting longstanding operations carried out by the FBI with its informant Sater with Podesta's Dec. 2015 email that the Clinton camp should "slaughter" Trump using "Russia as a hatchet". We've learned a great deal about Fusion-GPS, and I think we'll get to know Hakluyt and the Halper-Cline CIA-MI6 Oxbridge cell and its sleeper agents better:

We also know that Felix Sater, a longtime business associate of Donald Trump and an FBI informant since December 1998 (he was signed up by Andrew Weismann), initiated the proposal to do a Trump Tower in Moscow. Don't take my word for it, that's what Robert Mueller reported:

In the late summer of 2015, the Trump Organization received a new inquiry about pursuing a Trump Tower project in Moscow. In approximately September 2015, Felix Sater . . . contacted Cohen (i.e., Michael Cohen) on behalf of I.C. Expert Investment Company (I.C. Expert), a Russian real-estate development corporation controlled by Andrei Vladimirovich Rozov. Sater had known Rozov since approximately 2007 and, in 2014, had served as an agent on behalf of Rozov during Rozov's purchase of a building in New York City. Sater later contacted Rozov and proposed that I.C. Expert pursue a Trump Tower Moscow project in which I.C. Expert would license the name and brand from the Trump Organization but construct the building on its own. Sater worked on the deal with Rozov and another employee of I.C. Expert. (see page 69 of the Mueller Report).

Sater's communication with Rozov were intercepted by western intelligence agencies--GCHQ and NSA. I do not know which agency put it into an intel report, but it was put into the system. The Sater FD-1023 will tell us whether or not Sater did this at the direction of the FBI or acted on his own initiative. The key point is that the "bait" to do something with the Russians came from a registered FBI informant.

By December of 2015, the Hillary Campaign decided to use the Russian angle on Donald Trump. Thanks to Wikileaks we have Campaign Manager John Podesta's email exchange in December 2015 with Democratic operative Brent Budowsky:

“That's good, sooner it's clarified the better, and the stronger the better,” Budowski replies, later adding: “Best approach is to slaughter Donald for his bromance with Putin, but not go too far betting on Putin re Syria.”

The program to slaughter Donald Trump using Russia as the hatchet was already underway.

This was more the opposition research. This was the weaponization of law enforcement and intelligence assets to attack political opponents. Hillary had covered the opposition research angle in London by hiring a firm comprised of former MI6 assets--Hakluyt:

there was a second, even more powerful and mysterious opposition research and intelligence firm lurking about with significant political and financial links to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her 2016 campaign for president against Donald Trump.

Meet London-based Hakluyt & Co., founded by three former British intelligence operatives in 1995 to provide the kind of otherwise inaccessible research for which select governments and Fortune 500 corporations pay huge sums. . . .

Hakluyt is described by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s Henry Williams as “one of the more secretive firms within the corporate investigations world” and as “a retirement home for ex-MI6 [British foreign intelligence] officers, but it now also recruits from the worlds of management consultancy and banking … ”

I do not believe that it is a mere coincidence that Australian diplomat, Alexander Downer, was the one credited by the FBI for launching the investigation into George Papadopolous: