Posted on 10/21/2020 1:57:44 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
ks between President Trump and Russia that was used in a controversial dossier, said on Wednesday that he wants to clear his name, adding that the claim by Trump’s allies that he is a “Russian agent” is “slander.”
In an interview published Wednesday by The New York Times, Danchenko said that after his identity was revealed in July, he began receiving threats and harassment, especially following Attorney General William Barr’s declassification of the fact that Danchenko was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation a decade ago.
While the FBI had closed the investigation by 2011, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and other Trump loyalists began calling Danchenko a “Russian agent” after his name was made public.
“I’ve never been a Russian agent,” Danchenko told the Times. “It is ridiculous to suggest that. This, I think, it’s slander.”
Among the leads Danchenko acquired on behalf of former British spy Christopher Steele was the claim that Russian intelligence officials had in their possession a video showing Trump engaging in sexual activities with prostitutes in Moscow's Ritz-Carlton hotel.
Danchenko said that while he admits the information was not strong in proving the existence of a sex tape, he claimed he was not responsible for how Steele used the information Danchenko gathered.
SNIP
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Oh, now he’s concerned with accuracy! The slander charge is exactly what a Russian agent would use!
“I’ve never been a Russian agent,” Danchenko told the Times. “It is ridiculous to suggest that. This, I think, it’s slander.”
Apparently, it wasn’t ridiculous to the FBI who investigated him in 2009. It looks like this stooge was a recruiter for the FSB/GRU. So he’s telling the truth that he wasn’t a “spy.”
Says the Russian Agent....
If there is no proof that Danchenko was a spy, then he should not have been called a spy. There are plenty of other things to call him.
He has worked for a socialist-communist political organization (Brookings) against the interests of the US, “so at this point, what difference does it make”?
He admits to giving Steele questionable intelligence which Steele believed or wanted to believe was legitimate.
Why is the NYT doing this interview? Doing so confirms the Steele dossier was based on questionable intelligence.
Are they trying to cover their own culpability? Is their defense for the Russia news reports, 'we were fooled by this guy like Steele and everyone else'?
Obviously Amish.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.