by Gordon M. Hahn
There are many clear and implied takeaways from the U.S. indictment of Igor Danchenko available to see for those with wide eyes open. Danchenko was the main source for the now debunked Steele Dossier that Democrat operatives from the Clinton Campaign, Clinton’s campaign law firm Perkins Coie, and the FBI, which all overlapped in the attempt to imprison innocent Americans and Paul Manafort on false Russia collusion charges, steal the 2016 presidential election and cripple the presidency of Donald Trump. The dossier became the key data point the FBI used to secure a series of FISA warrants to surveil the Trump campaign. Again, I am no Trump supporter as my previous articles on Trump demonstrate, but the law is the law. Obama, the Clintons, and Biden attempted to subvert the American republic far beyond anything Nixon or the Patriot Act ever approached. This becomes increasingly clear on almost a daily basis with a daily flow of documented evidence regarding machinations from the dossier, to the DNC hack, to the 2020 election fraud, to the FBI-led false flag op of 6 January 2021. But let’s stick to the indictment for now.
TAKEAWAY 1. The indictment charges Danchenko with several counts of “lying” to the FBI. However, it would be wrong to conclude that the FBI is innocent in this affair, as I and others have shown elsewhere (https://gordonhahn.com/2021/11/04/working-paper-comparing-the-russian-and-american-revolutions-from-above-part-1/). The indictment makes clear that as early as 2017 wired FBI agents were interviewing Danchenko (http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, p. 34). This again demonstrates that FBI Director James Comey, special commission chairman and former FBI Director Robert Mueller, and lesser FBI figures such as deputy director McCabe and the notorious Peter Strzok knew the dossier was filled with wholes and likely came from the Clinton Campaign which financed Perkins Coie’s work, which included FBI official Bruce Ohr’s wife on the dossier alongside Steele. And remember that FBI officials and lawyers lied on documents they submitted to the FISA court to put the dossier and its main author in a falsely positive light as a reliable source. So the Obama-Clinton-Biden Russiagate hoax was part of an attempted state coup, marking the birth of the nascent American revolution from above (https://gordonhahn.com/2021/10/29/the-russian-and-american-revolutions-from-above-in-comparative-perspective-tentative-conclusions/ and https://gordonhahn.com/2021/11/04/working-paper-comparing-the-russian-and-american-revolutions-from-above-part-1/).
TAKEAWAY 2. The indictment makes clear that much of the dossier was simply conjured up. Most importantly, the key claim in the Steele dossier that clinched the FBI’s winning FISA warrants — that “(i)n late July 2016, Source E, an ethnic Russian close associate of Republican US presidential candidate Donald TRUMP, admitted that there was a well-developed conspiracy of co-operation between them and the Russian leadership. This was managed on the TRUMP side by the Republican candidate’s campaign manager” — Danchenko claimed came for the president of the American-Russian Chamber of Commerce, with whom he never spoke and who never communicated with Danchenko in writing, by phone, or in person. Nevertheless, Danchenko lied to the FBI numerous times about this claim but eventually acknowledged he never communicated with chamber president (www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, pp. 12-13 and 29-36). In other words, there was no Source E and no evidence of a Trump-Putin ‘conspiracy of cooperation.
TAKEAWAY 3. One of Danchenko’s lies to the FBI was his denial that he got information for the dossier from unidentified by name “PR Executive-1” with strong, long-standing ties to Hillary Clinton. Thus, the Steele dossier had as sources not Danchenko’s friends but Steele’s imagination and Clinton campaign operatives such as “PR Executive-1” identified in the Danchenko indictment as “PR Executive-1. PR Exec-1 had served as (1) chairman of a national Democratic political organization, (2) state chairman of former President Clinton’s 1992 and 1996 presidential campaigns, and (3) an advisor to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential campaign. Moreover, beginning in or about 1997, President Clinton appointed PR Executive-! to two four-year terms on an advisory commission at the U.S. StateDepartment. With respect to the 2016 Clinton Campaign, PR Executive-! actively campaigned and participated in calls and events as a volunteer on behalf of Hillary Clinton” (www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, p. 6). PR Exec-1 is reported to be Charles Dolan, who headed the PR firm Ketchum, which has been very active in Russia for years. According to the indictment, he claimed the Clinton campaign did not know about his dealings with Danchenko. We would be remiss in not expecting a Dolan indictment.
TAKEAWAY 4. It was not Trump or his campaign but rather Democrat Party (DP) operatives and the Clinton Campaign that colluded with Russians during the 2016 presidential campaign. PR Executive-1 (Dolan), who is giving Danchenko information for the Steele Dossier on behalf of Hillary’s failed campaign, had been hired by the Kremlin “to handle global public relations for the Russian government” and worked for the state-owned energy company, Gazprom–the same GazProm that Putin uses to ‘deploy oil and gas as a weapon.’ The Danchenko indictment notes that PR Executive-1 (Dolan) “frequently interacted with senior Russian Federation leadership whose names would later appear in the Company Reports (Steele dossier), including the Press Secretary of the Russian Presidential Administration (“RussianPress Secretary-1”) ,the Deputy Press Secretary(“Russian Deputy Press Secretary-1”), and others in the Russian Presidential Press Department. Additionally, PR Executive-1 maintained relationships with the then-Russian Ambassador to the United States(“Russian Ambassador-1”) and the head of the Russian Embassy’s Economic Section in Washington, D.C. (“Russian Diplomat-1″), both of whom also would later appear by name in the Company Reports” (www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, p. 6). PR Exec-1 (Dolan) also believes he is working with an FSB agent (Danchenko), as said PR Exec-1 (Dolan) is quoted in the Danchenko Indictment (www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, p. 8). Moreover, PR Exec-1 (Dolan) and Danchenko traveled to Moscow where they met with many Russian government officials and business people, any of whom could have been spreading rumors independently or at the behest of the Russian authorities for a myriad of reasons (www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, pp. 6-10, 13, 19-20, and 22–3). But as I discuss below, this possibility is beginning to seem an unlikely explanation, leaving only Steele’s, Danchenko’s, PR Exec-1’s interesting imaginations regarding Hillary’s and the DP indentitarians’ favorite white male bogeyman (https://gordonhahn.com/2020/06/05/russia-the-identitarian-bogey-man-of-american-politics/).
TAKEAWAY 5. Trump administration NSC Russia hand Fiona Hill appears to have been well aware of the Clinton dossier plot and lied to the second Trump impeachment’s congressional hearings when she claimed not to know anything about the dossier’s origins. Not only was she close friends with Steele and introduced and recommended her former research assistant and co-author Danchenko to Steele for participation in Steele’s intelligence company ‘Orbis’, where incidentally, the allegedly Putin-poisoned Sergei Skrypal worked on the dossier with Steele. The indictment states that Hill introduced Danchenko to PR Executive-1 (Dolan) and that Steele told the FBI that he believed Hill knew that Danchenko was working on the dossier (www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment). , pp 5-6). Hill emphasized an old angle at the same hearings: the Russians did it. That is, according to Hill’s testimony, her pro-Clinton friends and allies, Steele and Danchenko, were not perpetrators, purveyors of disinformation; rather, they were victims of “Russian disinformation. ” According to the Danchenko indictment, the two main conduits of the ‘Russian’ disinformation to Hill’s “close friend” Steele were Hill’s close one-time associate Danchenko and PE Executive-1 (Dolan), both of whom were introduced to her close friend by Hill herself. It is odd that at the same time Hill, a former National Intelligence Council member and National Security Advisor to President Trump charged with the Russia/Eurasia portfolio, worked for years side-by-side a person (Danchenko) that PR Exec-1 (Dolan) thought was FSB, but she never smelled a rat. All this suggests that Hill indeed may very well have been aware that Danchenko and Dolan were working closely with Steele on the dossier and could even have been an instigator of the plot, given her adoration for Hillary and disdain for Trump. As I have written in another article, I hope this is not the case, but it clearly needs to be investigated (https://gordonhahn.com/2021/10/08/rusology-as-propaganda-russia-as-decaying-americas-political-football/). Odds are, special prosecutor John Durham is on it, given his thoroughness evidenced by previous indictments of Clintonite Russiagate plotters, FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who pled guilty to falsifying the FBI’s FISA warrant application documents, and the Clinton campaign’s lawyer Michael Sussman, who awaits trial. Another oddity is that, despite reports that Danchenko was investigated by the FBI as a possible Russian asset or agent, he has not been charged with anything but lies to the FBI designed cover up his and other Clintonites’ involvement in the dossier plot.
TAKEAWAY 6. The Russian disinformation angle — a likely fabricated line devised to keep alive the ‘Russian interference’ rage — appears to be under threat of being completely annihilated like the dossier itself. Our hero, Danchenko, has been served a civil law suit approved by a federal judge filed by at least some of the Russians mentioned not by name in the indictment as sources Steele and Danchenko cited from the latter’s and PR Exec-1’s visits and conference in Moscow, where, for example, the ‘information’ regarding Trump’s alleged cavorting with prostitutes was supposedly delivered to Danchenko and PR Exec-1 (Dolan). The plaintiffs are charging Danchenko with lying that they gave them such information (https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2021-11/MotionServedDanchenko.pdf). Russian journalist Lyudmilla Podobedova said in a sworn declaration submitted to U.S. District Judge Richard Leon on June 21: “In contrast to what Mr. Danchenko told U.S. authorities, I was not a ‘source’ for the Dossier.” “I never provided Mr. Danchenko (or anyone else) with any information related to the contents of the Dossier …” “My view is that once Mr. Danchenko realized that the Dossier was coming under scrutiny, he decided to point at me to make it look as if I were involved in the Dossier and thus add credibility to his work” (https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2021-11/PodobedovaDeclaration.pdf and https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/deliberate-fraud-russian-charged-lying-fbi-about-dossier). Russian academic Alexei Dundich has made identical charges in the civil law suit (https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2021-11/DundichAffidavitReDanchecnko.pdf and https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/deliberate-fraud-russian-charged-lying-fbi-about-dossier). A third supposed ‘Russian source,’ banking industry journalist and currency collector Ivan Vorontsov alleges in the civil suit declaration that he was falsely depicted asthe dossier’s “Sub-Source 2” and that Danchenko later even apologized for this (https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2021-11/VorontsovDeclaration.pdf and https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/deliberate-fraud-russian-charged-lying-fbi-about-dossier).
TAKEAWAY 7. The Steele dossier was nothing but a pro-Clinton, anti-Trump PR op, in which the anti-Clinton Kremlin played no role and the Clinton Campaign played the lead role, and all parties to the dossier knew it. Thus, Danchenko sought to protect the campaign-dossier connection by lying to the FBI that PR Executive-1 (Dolan) was not the source of anything in the dossier (http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, p. 18). All the parties were explicitly pro-Clinton and expressed this to each other, and even dossier sub-sources communicated with the Clinton Campaign’s PR Exec-1 (Dolan). For example, one of Danchenko’s sources and dossier ‘sub-source’ wrote to the Clinton Campaign’s PR Executive-1, describing himself as “a big Hillary fan” (http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21098456-danchenko-indictment, p. 12).
TAKEAWAY 8. There will be more indictments. Hopefully, one will be served to Hillary Rodham Clinton.
TAKEAWAY 9. What did Barack Obama know and when did he know it? Pertinent to Takeaways 8 and 9, on 28 July CIA Director John Brennan informed then-President Obama on Hillary’s plan to frame Trump as a Russia colluder as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the upcoming presidential election. Brennan’s notes (which were not declassified until 2020) read in part: “We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from [REDACTED]…CITE [summarizing] allegedly approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service” (https://spectator.org/john-durham-and-the-mysterious-dnc-email-hack/ and www.foxnews.com/politics/dni-brennan-notes-cia-memo-clinton).
About the Author – Gordon M. Hahn, Ph.D., is an Expert Analyst at Corr Analytics, http://www.canalyt.com and a Senior Researcher at the Center for Terrorism and Intelligence Studies (CETIS), Akribis Group, www.cetisresearch.org. Dr. Hahn is the author of The Russian Dilemma: Security, Vigilance, and Relations with the West from Ivan III to Putin (McFarland, forthcoming in 2021), Ukraine Over the Edge: Russia, the West, and the “New Cold War” (McFarland, 2018), The Caucasus Emirate Mujahedin: Global Jihadism in Russia’s North Caucasus and Beyond (McFarland, 2014), Russia’s Islamic Threat (Yale University Press, 2007), and Russia’s Revolution From Above: Reform, Transition and Revolution in the Fall of the Soviet Communist Regime, 1985-2000 (Transaction, 2002). He also has published numerous think tank reports, academic articles, analyses, and commentaries in both English and Russian language media.
Dr. Hahn also has taught at Boston, American, Stanford, San Jose State, and San Francisco State Universities and as a Fulbright Scholar at Saint Petersburg State University, Russia and has been a senior associate and visiting fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Kennan Institute in Washington DC, and the Hoover Institution.