In June, 2016, after news broke that the Democratic National Committee had been hacked, a group of prominent computer scientists went on alert. Reports said that the infiltrators were probably Russian, which suggested to most members of the group that one of the countrys intelligence agencies had been involved. They speculated that if the Russians were hacking the Democrats they must be hacking the Republicans, too. We thought there was no way in the world the Russians would just attack the Democrats, one of the computer scientists, who asked to be identified only as Max, told me. The group was smalla handful of scientists, scattered across the countryand politically diverse. (Max described himself as a John McCain Republican.). . .I met with Max and his lawyer repeatedly, and interviewed other prominent computer experts. (Among them were Jean Camp, of Indiana University; Steven Bellovin, of Columbia University; Daniel Kahn Gillmor, of the A.C.L.U.; Richard Clayton, of the University of Cambridge; Matt Blaze, of the University of Pennsylvania; and Paul Vixie, of Farsight Security.) Several of them independently reviewed the records that Maxs group had discovered and confirmed that they would be difficult to fake. A senior aide on Capitol Hill, who works in national security, said that Maxs research is widely respected among experts in computer science and cybersecurity. . .In August, 2016, Max decided to reveal the data that he and his colleagues had assembled. If the covert communications were real, this potential threat to our country needed to be known before the election, he said. After some discussion, he and his lawyer decided to hand over the findings to Eric Lichtblau, of the Times. Lichtblau met with Max, and began to look at the data. . .As Lichtblau talked to experts, he became increasingly convinced that the data suggested a substantive connection. Not only is there clearly something there but theres clearly something that someone has gone to great lengths to conceal, he told me. Jean Camp, of Indiana University, had also vetted some of the data. These people who should not be communicating are clearly communicating, she said. In order to encourage discussion among analysts, Camp posted a portion of the raw data on her Web site. . .Over time, the F.B.I.s interest in the possibility of an Alfa Bank connection seemed to wane. An agency official told Lichtblau that there could be an innocuous explanation for the computer traffic. Then, on October 30th, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid wrote a letter to James Comey, the director of the F.B.I., charging that the Bureau was withholding information about close ties and coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia. We had a window, Lichtblau said. His story about Alfa Bank ran the next day. But it bore only a modest resemblance to what he had filed. The headline Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russiaseemed to exonerate the Trump campaign. And, though the article mentioned the server, it omitted any reference to the computer scientists who had told Lichtblau that the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank might have been communicating. We were saying that the investigation was basically overand it was just beginning, Lichtblau told me. That same day, Slate ran a story, by Franklin Foer, that made a detailed case for the possibility of a covert link between Alfa Bank and Trump. Foers report was based largely on information from a colleague of Maxs who called himself Tea Leaves. Foer quoted several outside experts; most said that there appeared to be no other plausible explanation for the data. . .In April, 2017, Lichtblau left the Times, after fifteen yearsin part, he said, because of the way that the Alfa Bank story was handled. He went to work for CNN, but resigned less than two months later, amid controversy over another story that he had worked on, about the Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci. This April, Lichtblau returned to the Times newsroom for a celebration: he had been part of a team of Times reporters that was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for its work on other aspects of the Trump campaign. . .Alfa Bank hired two cybersecurity firms, Mandiant and Stroz Friedberg, to review the data. Both firms reported that they had found no evidence of communications with the Trump Organization. The bank also began trying to uncover the anonymous sources in the Slate piece. Attorneys representing Alfa contacted Jean Camp, telling her that they were considering legal action and asking her to identify the researchers who had assembled the data. She declined to reveal their names. This is what tenure is for, she told me. Was There a Connection Between a Russian Bank and the Trump Campaign? A team of computer scientists sifted through records of unusual Web traffic in search of answers. (10/15/2018)