Posted on 05/23/2022 5:30:41 AM PDT by janetjanet998
Sands did work on the TOR node. She didn’t see any unusual activity from Spectrum Health. She learned that Alfa Bank had contracted Kirkland and Ellis.
She learned Mandiant investigators had traveled to Moscow and not found any evidence of a covert communication.
Seems that someone who had access to the White paper already gave it to the FBI before Sussmann
Adam Goldman
@adamgoldmanNYT
Shaw was able to interview mysterious CHS who also had access to the white paper that was circulating among some academics.
But given who had access to white paper it is probably a small circle.
Adam Goldman
@adamgoldmanNYT
Sands says that Heide told her the Alfa Bank allegation came from DOJ and it ended up in opening EC. Bosworth making the point that’s false - it came from Baker not DOJ.
Bosworth asks isn’t true that every step you took in this full investigation could have been done in a preliminary investigation.
That line of questioning seems intended to blunt something that Ryan Gaynor said earlier.
Sands said she never heard there was a close hold.
Sands wanted to know who wrote the white paper. Sands said she learned at some pt who the author of the white paper was. In a 10/6/16 email, she learns that FBI has CHS who says David Dagon of Ga Tech might be involved.
Chris Trifiletti, an agent in Springfield, ill, emailed with the info about CHS. Sands decided not to interview Dagon for a reason she cant remember exactly.
When Sands met with special counsel for the first time in 2019, she said if she had known the info had come from a political source it wouldn’t have affected the steps she took. Bosworth is showing FBI instant messages between SA agent Hellman and Sands.
Sands said on 10/4 that the report and analysis of the logs will be “enough to close this one down.” Hellman responded,”I hope so, what a waste of time...Any chance you get to work something like this that truly has 0 repercussions if you mess it up...take those opportunities”
Transscripts in
Sussmann Trial Day 6: FBI Assistant Director Bill Priestep, Special Agent Ryan Gaynor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMKsBkezCKw
John Haughey
@JFHaughey58
FBI agent Curtis Heide, former FBI deputy counsel Tricia Anderson, DNC employee Tom McMahon, and the prosecution’s “summary witness” will testify Tuesday. It is uncertain who that “summary witness” is to close out the prosecution’s case, likely sometime Thursday.
May 24
DOJ deputy assistant attorney general Tricia Anderson takes the stand. Her notes taken after speaking with former general counsel James Baker after he received data, documents from Sussmann is evidence in the case.
Prosecutor Brittain Shaw ends her examination of Anderson in less than 10 minutes. Like FBI agent Bill Priestap Monday, she doesn’t recall specifics and is testifying on notes taken during meetings she cannot recall. #SussmannTrial
Govt calls Heide
Heide has worked at the FBI for more than 16 years. He is the SSRA in Des Moines. He manages about two dozen people. In 2009, he moved to Chicago to work CI matters.
Jonathan Algor is questioning. He’s another prosecutor on Durham’s team from EDNY. Heide says he worked on the HRC email case: Midyear. He also supported the initial efforts of Crossfire Hurricane.
Heide says he is being investigating by FBI.He’s being investigated for not IDing exculpatory info. (I believe FBI OPR is doing inquiry). Heide says he did not intentionally withhold exculpatory info — a consensual recording related to the Carter Page FISA.
Heide is explaining the meaning of a full field investigation and the different levels of investigation at the FBI. A full field allows the FBI to use the most intrusive methods or tools. And there is no time limit to the investigation. The Alfa Bank inquiry was also a SIM
Heide is now explaining why the EC says the info came from DOJ and not the FBI. He’s says the info might have been conflated.
Heide says they could not substantiate any of the allegations in the white paper. Heidi says cyber deferred the matter to CI for further investigation
Heide now reviewing FBI instant messages with J.P. and Scott Hellman. Heide writes to JP on 9/22/16. “I just talked with cyber division. we’re leaning toward this being a false server not attributed to the trump organization.”
John Haughey
@JFHaughey58
·
8m
Replying to
@JFHaughey58
Heide offers one explanation for who, what ordered the “full” DOJ probe despite initial reviews revealing no fire with this smoke: The Chicago FBI office “may have been conflating the US Department of Justice and our own office of general counsel.
Heide is now explaining why the EC says the info came from DOJ and not the FBI. He’s says the info might have been conflated.
Heide and Allison Sands, who testified Monday, were co-case agents in investigating the allegations. He is under DOJ inquiry for “not identifying exculpatory information” in #CrossfireHurricane probe. Exculpatory information is a fact that negates an allegation.
Adam Goldman
@adamgoldmanNYT
More FBI instant messages between Heide and J.P. Heide asks J.P. on 9/26/16 if he can interview the source of the white paper. Algor turns to a previous 10/3/16 email in which Heide asks HQ Supervisor Gaynor if he can interview the source.
That email was examined yesterday during Gaynor’s testimony. Heide said there was another agent (tom grasso) at HQ who provided Heide with info (IP addresses).
This is now crossing over into Steele
Heide says it’s important to know the source of the info and why it was brought to the fbi. In the case, it was right before an election, he said. You would want to know because the source could have bias. It appears that Grasso was handling Joffe, a former FBI CHS
Heide relays incident during midyear investigation when someone brought team information for political reasons. the FBI interviewed person and then decided to not to deal with that person again.
Berkowitz is questioing Heide now about Inspection Division investigation. Heide denies allegation which he concedes is serious.The allegation involves withholding exculpatory info from the FISC via a secret warrant.
Heide met with prosecutors 5x before the trial.
When Heide first met with Durham’s team he didn’t have a clear recollection of case. Heide says he played more of a support role in helping Allison Sands. That’s because Heide was in the middle of george papadopoulos case, Berkowitz said. Heide says yes.
Heide says the DOJ reference in opening EC is a “typo.”
Quick reminder: Crossfire Typhoon was FBI code name for Papadopoulos in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
Heide says he had no choice to open a full case because the FBI 7th floor demanded. Berkowitz making clear they could have used all the same steps as in preliminary investigation, which has 6-month window. In this case, Berkowitz says, the Alfa Bank inquiry ended in 4 months.
Heide was preparing for the NYT to publish a story about the Alfa Bank matter. Heide didnt know that the person brought info to FBI and the NYT. Heide said it was helpful to his investigation that the fbi had it before it was public.
Berkowitz produces more instant text messages: Heide tells Hellman: “I just briefed up to the AD level that we think its a bunk report..
Heide says he would have wanted to interview the original source and author of white paper.
Berkowitz shows an instant message from Ben Gessford to J.P. that shows they knew Sussmann was representing DNC — something Heide did not know and wanted to know.
Context: Gessford was one of the original Crossfire Hurricane agents. He was a CI guy who worked Robert Hanssen espionage case. I believe that Gessford is agent #2 in IG report about Carter Page FISA. FBI agent Stephen Somma is case agent #1`
Gessford went to that Rome meeting with Steele along with three other FBI officials.
As some of the names become public, I’ll try to provide context if I have it.
The instant message from 10/4/16 b/w Sands and Hellman about “0 repercussion” is not “something” that Heide would say.
Berkowitz demonstrating that Heide and others didn’t take obvious investigative steps during Alfa Bank investigation. Where is Berkowitz going with this line of questioning?
Sands writes an Oct. 5, 2016 email that says “we are going to speak David Dagon, see if he has any new information.”
Sands writes an Oct. 5, 2016 email that says “we are going to speak David Dagon, see if he has any new information.”
Berkowitz produces a 1023 from the FBI CHS who was providing info about Alfa Bank matter. Berkowitz only displayed the 1023 momentarily. But it was generated out of Springfield, IL
Berkowitz produces FBI 302 dated 4/3/17. “When the Mandiant investigative team arrived, Alfa bank did not have any historical data, and only saved logs for 24 hours.”
Heide concedes the FBI’s Alfa Bank investigation was incomplete after not doing these interviews. Berkowitz sits down.
Berkowitz: “That is a serious allegation … that you intentionally withheld information that could help prove an individual’s innocence … a serious allegation. You have denied it. Heide: The case is still pending.
John Haughey
@JFHaughey58
·
1h
Replying to
@JFHaughey58
Before proceedings began Monday, Cooper and attorneys discussed upcoming testimony from a witness engaged in “an unadjudicated matter.” Berkowitz expressed concern that the witness could be testifying to “curry favor with the governmen
Berkowitz asked Heide how many times he’s met with prosecutors to iron out testimony. “A handful,” Heide said. “Five times — that’s a handful,” Berkowitz said, including three times in May with the last session on May 19 ... “last Thursday after court.
Investigation’s origin after FBI cyber experts dismissed allegations within a day remains opaque with FBI counterintelligence agent Curtis Heide saying it was mislabeled a DOJ probe because of a “typo” perhaps attributable to “conflating” DOJ and FBI’s office of general counsel
It is your testimony sitting here today that both the opening of the case and closing of the case had a typo?” Berkowitz asked, noting that it indicates “not a lot of attention to detail.” Heide: “There were some mistakes, yes.”
udge had previously ruled that emails between Joffe and the researchers were not admissible. The govt now argues that Berkowitz opened the door to use the emails. The court does not believe Berkowitz opened the door and his line of questioning went to materiality.
Judge Cooper says they’re not going to get into researcher/s motivations.
John Haughey
@JFHaughey58
Judge Christoper Cooper has denied prosecution’s request to introduce emails between Georgia Tech cyber expert David Dagon and others after Berkowitz asked Heide if he followed-up on agent Tom Grosso’s offer to provide Dagon as a “private sector subject expert.”
Prosecution maintained Berkowitz’s questioning of Heide “opened the door” to “materiality” for those emails to be introduced. Cooper disagreed. “Mr. Berkowitz confined his questions” to demonstrate “the FBI could have interviewed Mr. Dagon” but chose not to.
Cooper said email relates more to Rodney Joffe’s views, motivations, and said when Heide returns to stan for redirect, the prosecution can ask “what he would have asked in an interview of Mr. Dagon. We are not going to get into” Dagon’s views, motivations.
Heide being asked about 9/14/16 email from Joffe to David Dagon, Manos Antonakakis and April Lorenzen. “NOT to be able to say that this is, with out doubt, fact, but to merely be plausible.” Heide says the line in the email suggests that the report may have been fabricated.
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.