“Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was un-fired when the Department of Justice (DOJ) - now firmly under a Democratic administration - agreed to settle with McCabe by fully restoring his FBI pension and removing all records from his FBI personnel file that indicate he was fired for cause.

It wasn't really a settlement. McCabe sued the government, and the DOJ said, "Okay, we'll give you what you want." The agreement does not change the findings of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz that McCabe lied under oath to investigators on three occasions; it simply eliminates all consequences for doing so.

Oh, and it also forks over half a million dollars of taxpayer money to cover McCabe's attorney's fees. That'll teach him a lesson for lying after raising his right hand three times and swearing not to…”

More in article.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/t...ce-is-a-signal%3famp

regarding the "new" George Stephanopoulos interview w Christopher Steele:

Julia Macfarlane : "It’s been the highlight of my career working on the Steele documentary for @GStephanopoulos with @mattmosk for the last three years . Astounding journalists - but also kind and generous colleagues. Thanks to George for the kind mention"

Jeff Carlson: "Three years... Three years for this propaganda piece that pretended Steele was working in good faith rather than as a paid political operative.

Three years for a documentary that ignored how his "sources" disavowed his reporting under oath. They've had this prepped & waiting."

xxxxxxxxxxxx

Stephanopoulos was Bill Clinton's senior advisor for policy and strategy. He gave $75k to the Clinton Foundation

Steele is arguing the dossier is true or "possibly true" after every aspect has been discredited. The key sources have signed affidavits that they never said what was in the dossier.

Three years for Steele to finally pop up again - only for the MSM (of all people) to consitantly call his report "discredited" and then go into detail about how it was discredited and came from Hill and "Democratic operatives" in GPS.

I don't believe the media has any shame. I do believe the odd editor and producer can sense when the winds are shifting.

Techno Fog reports that John Durham has provided Michael Sussmann with 81,000 pages of documents as part of discovery for the defense

Some of that was documents received in response to grand jury subpoenas to 15 individuals, entities and organizations. Including political organizations, a university, university researchers, an investigative firm, and numerous companies.

The university is probably Georgia Tech.

Running in parallel w Durham is Alfa Banks filings in their Florida defamation case. David Dagon (Senior Research Scientist at Georgia Tech) has refused to comply with Alfa Bank subpoenas and intends to invoke constitutional privileges against self-incrimination.

in the event there is ever some follow on action in the Durham investigation, this article provides a good over view of who the actors are

https://spectator.org/john-durhams-salad-shooter/


Rodney Joffe claimed to have been offered a position in the government in the event Hillary Clinton won the Presidency and stated in a post-election email, “I was tentatively offered the top [cybersecurity] job by the Democrats when it looked like they’d win.

April Lorenzen, a resident of Rhode Island who helped found two tech firms that have government cybersecurity contracts] was a business associate of Joffe and “had assembled purported DNS data reflecting apparent DNS lookups” between the Alfa Bank and an email domain, “mail1.trump-email.com.”

the significance of these data was doubtful since “mail1.trump-email.com” was not a Trump Organization server. Instead, it was an outside domain operated by a customer relationship management company used by the Trump Organization to send out marketing emails. As for the “DNS lookups,” they were generated by the Alfa Bank server trying to validate the sender of the emails. This sort of “look up” is commonly used by computer servers to sort out junk emails.

Joffe tasked Lorenzen and two Georgia Tech researchers to “search broadly through Internet data for any information about Trump’s potential ties to Russia.” His announced goal was to support an “inference” and “narrative” regarding Trump that would please certain “VIPs.”

But, despite their best efforts, they were unable to find any communications between Trump, his campaign, companies, or associates and Russian interests.

“[o]n or about August 20, 2016,” Lorenzen emailed Joffe and the Georgia Tech researchers stating in regard to the DNS data that “even if we found what Joffe asks us to find, we don’t see the money flow, and we don’t see the content of some message saying ‘send the money here.’”

She then explained that it would be possible to “fill out a sales form on two web sites, faking the other company’s email address in each form,” and thereby cause them “ to appear to communicate with each other in DNS .” Lorenzen then concluded that, if Joffe “can take the *inference* [sic] we gain through this team exercise … then work to develop even an inference may be worthwhile…”

Joffe: “Being able to provide evidence of *anything* [sic] that shows an attempt to behave badly in relation to this, the VIPs would be happy. They’re looking for a true story that could be used as a basis for closer examination.”

“Trump has claimed he and his compan[ies] have had NO dealings with .ru [Russia] other than the failed Casino, and the Miss Universe pageant. He claims absolutely NO interaction with any financial institutions. So any potential like that would be jackpot.”

Joffe emailed Lorenzen and the Georgia Tech researchers urging them to “push forward” with additional research concerning Trump, which he stated would “give the base a very useful narrative.” He then expressed his belief that the “trump-email.com” domain was not a secret communications channel with the Alfa Bank, but a “red herring” noting that the host for the Trump domain “is a legitimate valid [customer relationship management] company.” He concluded that “we can ignore it, together with others that seem to be part of the marketing world.”

On August 22, 2016, one of the Georgia Tech researchers emailed the group expressing doubt about the Trump-Alfa Bank narrative that Sussmann was preparing to convey to the FBI and raised concerns about the group’s bias against Trump. Regarding the DNS data, he asked, “How do we plan to defend against the criticism that this is not spoofed traffic we are observing? There is no answer to that.”

“The only thing that drive[s] us at this point is that we just do not like [Trump]. This will not fly in the eyes of public scrutiny. Folks, I am afraid we have tunnel vision. Time to regroup?”

Despite these expressed reservations and objections, Sussmann, Joffe, Lorenzen, and the Georgia Tech researchers began to draft, review, and revise a “white paper” summarizing the Alfa Bank allegations that Sussmann later provided to the FBI, the media, and the CIA.

Five days before Sussmann met with the FBI, Joffe sent Sussmann’s draft of the proposed “white paper” to Lorenzen and the Georgia Tech researchers, and asked their views as to whether the paper’s allegations would be “plausible” to “security experts,” even if the allegations were not demonstrably true.

“Please read as if you had no prior knowledge or involvement, and you were handed this document as a security expert (NOT a dns expert) and were asked: ‘Is this plausible as an explanation?’ NOT to be able to say that this is, without doubt, fact, but to merely be plausible.”

they wanted to trigger an FBI investigation

One of the Georgia Tech researchers emailed that the white paper achieved Joffe’s objective by “smartly” avoiding discussions of weaknesses or “holes” in the paper’s hypothesis.

“A DNS expert would poke several holes to [sic] this hypothesis (primarily around visibility, about which very smartly you do not talk about). That being said, I do not think even the top security (non-DNS) researchers can refute your statements. Nice!”

one of the Georgia tech researchers emailed that, although questions remained, the white paper should be shared with the government.

The next day, in discussing the narrative Sussmann was to convey to the FBI, Lorenzen emailed that Joffe “has carefully crafted a message that could work to accomplish the goals.”

The conspirators recognized that their Trump Organization–Alfa Bank narrative didn’t hold water and couldn’t withstand analysis by DNS data experts. But they believed it would be plausible enough to trick the FBI into investigating. That was the whole point. Once the FBI started an inquiry, the fact that Trump was being investigated by the government for possible ties to Russia would be leaked to the news media.

the conspirators’ alleged campaign dirty trick became a criminal matter once it was used to trick and deceive the government into wasting its time, energy and resources investigating the hoax. Think of it in terms of making a false report of a crime to the local police.

Sussmann’s lawyers moved for a bill of particulars alleging that the indictment lacks sufficient detail and clarity for their client to prepare his defense.

on October 7, the government “made its first production of discovery to the defense” which “included more than 6,000 documents, comprising approximately 81,000 pages.”

Calling John Durham, calling Mr. Durham.
You there buddy?
Time to start moving.

Mr. Durham you hold the key and we know it.
Listen at least to the last 30 seconds if not the whole video.

John Durham to Call Former FBI Lawyer to Testify in Case Involving Former Democrat Lawyer

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...iVABHSuqkQxNFQ%3D%3D

Prosecutors working with special counsel John Durham’s team indicated on Tuesday they may call former FBI General Counsel James Baker to testify in the case of former Democrat attorney Michael Sussmann, who was indicted for allegedly lying to the FBI.

During a status hearing Tuesday, Durham prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis and his team said they plan to call Baker, who now works for Twitter, to testify as part of the case against Sussmann, according to Fox News and the Washington Examiner. Last month, Sussmann pleaded not guilty to making a false statement to a federal agent.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper asked Sussmann’s lawyers and prosecutors to continue with their discovery process, which could take months. The prosecution said that 6,000 documents were provided to Sussmann’s defense, amounting to more than 80,000 pages in total.

Durham’s indictment against Sussmann, who previously worked for high-powered law firm Perkins Coie, is that he made false statements in September 2016 when he told Baker he wasn’t working for a client when he provided claims that alleged the existence of backchannel communications between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank. Perkins Coie has long represented the Democrat Party in election-related lawsuits.

The indictment alleges that Sussmann was actually working for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and was charging her team for it as well as a technology executive. Several reports have identified the executive as Rodney Joffee.

In a recent court filing (pdf) on Oct. 20, Durham’s team said it provided the 80,000 pages of discovery documents to Sussmann’s defense team earlier in the month.

Documents were obtained “in response to grand jury subpoenas issued to fifteen separate individuals, entities, and organizations—including among others, political organizations, a university, university researchers, an investigative firm, and numerous companies,” the special counsel’s office said.

Perkins Coie was the law firm that had hired Fusion GPS on behalf of the Democratic National Committee, which then hired former British MI6 agent Christopher Steele to produce the now-discredited dossier now known as the “Steele dossier.” Baker, meanwhile, had testified before the House Judiciary Committee in 2018 saying that Sussmann had provided him with the allegations that a Russian bank was communicating with a server in the Trump Tower.

“This false representation led the General Counsel to understand that the defendant was providing the information as a good citizen, rather than a paid advocate or political operative,” said Durham’s court filing earlier this month. “In fact, the defendant had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive at a U.S.-based Internet company and the Hillary Rodham Clinton Presidential Campaign.”

Going further, prosecutors said that to craft “white papers” on the allegation former President Donald Trump had connections with a Russian bank, the technology executive “used his access at multiple organizations to gather and mine public and non-public Internet data regarding Trump and his associates, with the goal of creating a ‘narrative’ regarding the candidate’s ties to Russia.”

The executive then “directed and caused employees of two companies in which he had an ownership interest” in two technology companies to “search and analyze their holdings of public and non-public internet data for derogatory information on Trump,” prosecutors say.

The Epoch Times has contacted Sussmann’s lawyers for additional comment.

After his indictment last month, Sussmann’s lawyers issued statements questioning Durham’s case.

“The Special Counsel has brought a false statement charge on the basis of a purported oral statement made over five years ago for which there is only a single witness, Mr. Baker; for which there is no recording; and for which there are no contemporaneous notes by anyone who was actually in the meeting,” said his lawyers in a statement.

The lawyers continued: “Not only that, but the Special Counsel has brought this false statement charge even though Mr. Sussmann has consistently maintained—including in testimony under oath—that he met with Mr. Baker on behalf of a cyber expert client.”

Baker now serves as deputy counsel for Twitter after leaving the FBI in 2018.

During the closed-door testimony, Baker told the House panel he previously had a “personal relationship” with Sussmann because “both worked in the criminal division together at the Department of Justice.”

Last year, Durham indicted former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith with making a false statement when he altered an email about former Trump campaign aide Carter Page and added words saying he was “not a source” after a CIA liaison said he provided information to the agency. The Department of Justice had relied on Clinesmith’s assertion when it renewed an application in 2017 to surveil Page under a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant.

Clinesmith was ultimately sentenced to 12 months of probation and 400 hours of community service.

The next court date in Sussmann’s case was set for a status hearing on Dec. 8 at 2 p.m., Cooper said.

quote:

“The Special Counsel has brought a false statement charge on the basis of a purported oral statement made over five years ago for which there is only a single witness, Mr. Baker; for which there is no recording; and for which there are no contemporaneous notes by anyone who was actually in the meeting,” said his lawyers in a statement.

Sussmann was a heavy hitter at Perkins Coie. Marc Elias was an even bigger heavy hitter at Perkins Coie.

If Durham's case is weak or false why did both Sussmann and Elias leave Perkins Coie ?

What message would be sent if Perkins Coie cut loose two of its top lawyers because of weak charges by a Special Counsel appointed by a Trump AG ?

MHO - Perkins Coie law firm is maneuvering to keep more of their people from being indicted or even their company from being indicted. They know some bad stuff went down in the campaign to damage Donald Trump with fabricated lies coordinated over a very wide range of actors.

Let's keep an eye on who the DNC uses as lead lawyers for the 2022 elections. It used to be Marc Elias. He was very effective at getting REP officials to illegally change their voting rules w/o the "required" state legislature approval. Changes that made it easier to cheat. Elias was always the lead lawyer to steer DEMs to victory in contested elections nationwide. Will the DEMs stick w Elias ?

????

Igor Danchenko arrested.

Danchenko was the primary researcher for Steele's dossier.

reading the indictment

Danchenko lied to the FBI

falsely claimed he never communicated w "PR Executive-1" (some public relations exec)

PR Exec -1 sourced 1 or more of the allegations to the dossier

PR Exec-1 worked for a DC based public relations firm "PR Firm -1"

PR Exec -1 had served as chair of a national DEM political org. and was an advisor to Hillary Clinton 2008 campaign

indictment:

https://storage.courtlistener....aed.515692.1.0_2.pdf

still not clear what is happening but sounds interesting

remember that Steele just had the interview w Stephanopoulos. Steele claimed the dossier was true. Seemed odd.


internet sleuths suspect PR Exec-1 is Charles Dolan of kglobal

quote:

Igor Danchenko arrested.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...r-danchenko-n2598565

Federal authorities on Thursday arrested Igor Danchenko, a Russian analyst who contributed to the discredited, anti-Trump Steele dossier.

According to The New York Times, Danchenko was “the primary researcher” of the dossier, which compiled unfounded rumors about the 45th president in an effort to show he was “compromised by and conspiring with Russian intelligence officials” to help bring Hillary Clinton down. The document was then used by the FBI to illegally spy on the Trump campaign in 2016.

[M]ost of the important claims in the dossier — which was written by Mr. Danchenko’s employer, Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent — have not been proven, and some have been refuted. F.B.I. agents interviewed Mr. Danchenko in 2017 when they were seeking to run down the claims in the dossier. [...]

A 2019 investigation by the Justice Department’s inspector general sharply criticized the F.B.I. for continuing to cite material from the dossier after the bureau interviewed Mr. Danchenko without alerting judges that some of what he said had cast doubt on the contents of the dossier.

The inspector general report also said that a decade earlier, when Mr. Danchenko worked for the Brookings Institution, a prominent Washington think-tank, he had been the subject of a counterintelligence investigation into whether he was a Russian agent.

In an interview with The New York Times in 2020, Mr. Danchenko defended the integrity of his work, saying he had been tasked to gather “raw intelligence” and was simply passing it on to Mr. Steele. Mr. Danchenko — who made his name as a Russia analyst by exposing indications that the dissertation of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia contained plagiarized material — also denied being a Russian agent.

“I’ve never been a Russian agent,” Mr. Danchenko said. “It is ridiculous to suggest that. This, I think, it’s slander.”

Mr. Steele’s efforts were part of opposition research that Democrats were indirectly funding by the time the 2016 general election took shape. Mr. Steele’s business intelligence firm was a subcontractor to another research firm, Fusion GPS, which in turn had been hired by the Perkins Coie law firm, which was working for the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Mr. Danchenko said he did not know who Mr. Steele’s client was at the time and considered himself a nonpartisan analyst and researcher. (NYT)

The false statements to the FBI likely relate to (at a minimum) --

Telling FBI he didn't have any prior contacts w/ Russian intel.

Former Attorney General Bill Barr tapped U.S. Attorney John Durham in May 2019 to examine the origins of the Russia investigation. Danchenko’s arrest is part of the Durham probe.

part of danchenko indictment

first thoughts:

U.K. Investigative Firm = Orbis (Steele's firm)

U.K. Person -1 = Steele

Note the date

Does this tie Clinton campaign directly into the dossier? (as a source of info)

?? Was PR exec-1 the source of the pee tape story ????

Danchenko told FBI that Sergei Millian was the source. Millian denied ever talking to Danchenko


Fool Nelson: Clinton advisor was communicating with a litany of high level Russian officials.

At the same time, Hillary Clinton was accusing Trump of communicating with Russian officials.

danchenko lying isn't the big deal here. We knew he lied a long time ago.

What could be significant is the fact people tied to Clinton were feeding stories to Danchenko. who fed them to Steele. Steele back to Fusion and the FBI.
Fusion feeding their parasite friends in the media.

FBI persecuting Trump and members of his campaign. FBI feeding their own media lap dogs such as Wash Post.

Danchenko was given immunity by the Comey FBI when they interviewed him. But if he lied about something, the immunity doesn't protect him.

Jesse Waters guest hosts for Tucker tonight. Explosive revelations about the Steele Dossier, perhaps better called the Clinton Dossier. “PR Executive-1” identified. Lots here

tmats,

The Watters video is great. Walks thru the current status of Durham investigation and puts it all together.

Also comes out and names Charles Dolan. Note the indictment does not include names of the actors. Internet sleuths researched a lot of material and named Dolan as PR Exec-1.

now Fox runs w it. Awesome.

It is way too late and who knows what happens, but Durham has dug deep into the conspiracy and is putting spotlights of some of the key DEM and Clinton operatives who significantly damaged Donald Trump.

I would really like to see Trump sue the crap out of these individuals.

xxxxxxxxxxxx

adding
here is why Fox named Dolan

Sean Davis:

Think of all the lies and crimes we've learned about in the last 4 years that were the foundation of the entire Russian collusion hoax perpetrated against us by our own government.

And then think about the number of DOJ/FBI whistleblowers who came forward to tell the truth: 0.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Christopher Steele 2 weeks ago:

"we were the professionals, we've done this throughout our careers and we were confident that the majority of the sources were highly reliable and others were moderately to highly reliable which is a good position to be in when you are doing intelligence work"

video of the phony Steele saying this:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1456419359472111620

xxxxxxxxx

steele knew what was coming from Durham and has been working to paint a different picture

posted previously:

Ivan Vorontsov (source #2 to Danchenko)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

Link to WSJ article from Kim Strassel...shoudl not be behind paywall...

Durham and the Clinton Dossier
A new indictment continues the slow unraveling of a 2016 political scandal.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/d...opwebshare_permalink

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:



danchenko lying isn't the big deal here. We knew he lied a long time ago.

What could be significant is the fact people tied to Clinton were feeding stories to Danchenko. who fed them to Steele. Steele back to Fusion and the FBI.
Fusion feeding their parasite friends in the media.

FBI persecuting Trump and members of his campaign. FBI feeding their own media lap dogs such as Wash Post.

Danchenko was given immunity by the Comey FBI when they interviewed him. But if he lied about something, the immunity doesn't protect him.

Maybe Danchenko will start singing like a bird and tie things to the Clintons. Naaaa, never happen.

Lawyer: ‘PR Executive 1’ in Durham Indictment Is Former Democratic Party Campaigner

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...IqKGRDunsuGU3Y19rVj6

A lawyer on Thursday confirmed that Washington-based communications executive Charles Dolan Jr. is the individual referred to as “PR Executive-1” in special counsel John Durham’s indictment against Russia analyst Igor Danchenko, which was unsealed earlier this week.

The grand jury indictment of Dachenko alleges that he lied when he told the FBI that he never communicated with a public relations executive who had been active in the Democratic Party about claims in a dossier issued by former UK spy Christopher Steele.

Although the public relations executive, or “PR Executive-1,” is never named in the indictment, Dolan’s lawyer Ralph Martin told The Epoch Times on Friday that his client is the person in question.

“Chuck understands and appreciates your interest,” Martin told The Epoch Times, confirming reports on Thursday about Dolan’s identity.

“I can confirm that he is ‘PR Executive-1’ in the indictment. As he is a witness in an ongoing case, it would not be appropriate for Chuck to comment further on the allegations in the indictment at this time,” he added.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Dolan is the senior vice president of Kglobal, although the company appeared to remove his biography in recent days, instead returning a “404” error page. An archived version of Kglobal’s website says that in the 1990s, Dolan appeared to serve as the state chairman of the Virginia presidential campaigns of President Bill Clinton, was also the former executive director of the Democratic Governors’ Association, and had served as an advisor to then-Sen. Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire in 2008.

A Twitter account, “chas dolan,” that had been linked via the now-deleted Kglobal biography on Dolan, had a bio saying he “worked in every Democratic Presidential Campaign since 1980.” His last activity on the social media platform was a re-tweet of a Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) post promoting a Democrat-backed infrastructure bill proposal.

Reports from the New York Times and CNBC, as well as other online biographies, said that he worked as an advisor to the 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign, served as state chairman in Virginia for Bill Clinton’s two presidential campaigns, and was executive director for the Democratic Governors’ Association. Martin did not reply to questions about Dolan’s work for the Clinton campaigns.

Durham’s indictment revealed that Dolan and Danchenko were allegedly on speaking terms in April 2016 and discussed a “potential business collaboration” involving Dolan’s company. Later that year in August, the indictment alleges, Danchenko told Dolan that he was working on a “project against Trump” and asked for “[a]ny thought, rumor, allegation” related to former Donald Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, who had just resigned from his position over allegations about his dealings with Ukraine.

Dolan allegedly told Danchenko in response that “I had a drink with a GOP friend of mine” who provided information to him before he communicated with a Trump campaign staffer “who hates [Manafort] and still speaks to Trump regularly played a role,” according to the court filing.

“I think the bottom line is that in addition to the Ukraine revelations, a number of people wanted [Manafort] gone,” Dolan allegedly added, according to the indictment. “It is a very sharp elbows crowd.”

“Thank you for this. Any additional insights will be much appreciated. It is an important project for me, and our goals clearly coincide. I’ve been following the Russia trail in Trump’s campaign. It is there so what you read in the news is hardly an exaggeration. Some things are less dramatic while others are more than they seem,” Dachkeno replied, according to the indictment.

But at one point, prosecutors said, Dolan “acknowledged to the FBI that he never met with a ‘GOP friend’ in relation to this information that he passed” to Dachenko and instead “fabricated the fact of the meeting in his communications with Dachenko.” The indictment alleged that Dolan obtained that information about Manafort through media reports before passing that to Dachenko.

According to prosecutors, Dolan appeared to have extensive ties with clients in Russia, and at one point, he and Dachenko traveled to Moscow in 2016. He also met with officials at the Russian embassy in Washington, that same year, the indictment reads.

Dolan had also “maintained pre-existing and ongoing relationships with numerous persons named or described in” in the Steele dossier, of which Dachenko had contributed, the indictment said.

“In anticipation of the June 2016 Planning Trip to Moscow,” the indictment states, “PR Executive-I also communicated with Russian Press Secretary-I and Russian Deputy Press Secretary-I, both of whom worked in the Kremlin and, as noted above, also appeared in the [Steele dossier].”

And “from in or about 2006 through in or about 2014, the Russian Federation retained PR Executive-1 (Dolan) and his then-employer to handle global public relations for the Russian government and a state-owned energy company,” according to the indictment. He also had “served as a lead consultant during that project and frequently interacted with senior Russian Federation leadership whose names would later appear in the” Steele dossier, the court papers said.

Many claims within the dossier, which is a collection of dozens of Steele’s notes and memos, turned out to be false, triggering criminal, congressional, and inspector general investigations into how the reports were used for the basis of a secretive FBI surveillance campaign targeting a Trump campaign official, Carter Page.

The indictment further claimed that Danchenko lied about Dolan’s interaction with the Steele dossier when the FBI later tried to confirm its accuracy. This deprived the agency of the ability to find out about the “reliability, motivations, and potential bias” of the source, who had worked for Democratic politicians, prosecutors said Thursday.

Dolan told FBI investigators that he was not directed by the Clinton campaign and wasn’t aware of his dealings with Dachenko, Durham’s prosecutors alleged, although they said he also told the bureau that he didn’t realize the information he provided to Dachenko would end up with the FBI.