Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Australian diplomat’s tip a factor in FBI’s Russia probe

Drunken Trump policy adviser spilled the beans

- By Sharon LaFraniere, Mark Mazzetti and Mark Apuzzo

The New York Times

WASHINGTON — During a night of heavy drinking at an upscale London bar in May 2016, George Papadopoul­os, a young foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, made a startling revelation to Australia’s top diplomat in Britain: Russia had political dirt on Hillary Clinton.

About three weeks earlier, Mr. Papadopoul­os had been told that Moscow had thousands of emails that would embarrass Mrs. Clinton, apparently stolen in an effort to try to damage her campaign.

Exactly how much Mr. Papadopoul­os said that night at the Kensington Wine Rooms with the Australian, Alexander Downer, is unclear. But two months later, when leaked Democratic emails began appearing online, Australian officials passed the informatio­n about Mr. Papadopoul­os to their American counterpar­ts, according to four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australian­s’ role.

The hacking and the revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside informatio­n about it were driving factors that led the FBI to open an investigat­ion in July 2016 into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Donald Trump’s associates conspired.

While some of Mr. Trump’s advisers have derided Mr. Papadopoul­os as an insignific­ant campaign volunteer or a “coffee boy,” interviews and new documents show that he stayed influentia­l throughout the campaign. Two months before the election, for instance, he helped arrange a New York meeting between Mr. Trump and President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt.

The informatio­n that Mr. Papadopoul­os gave to the Australian­s answers one of the lingering mysteries of the past year: What so alarmed American officials to provoke the FBI to open a counterint­elligence investigat­ion into the Trump campaign months before the presidenti­al election?

It was not, as Mr. Trump and other politician­s have alleged, a dossier compiled by a former British spy hired by a rival campaign. Instead, it was firsthand informatio­n from one of America’s closest intelligen­ce allies.

Interviews and previously undisclose­d documents show that Mr. Papadopoul­os played a critical role in this drama and reveal a Russian operation that was more aggressive and widespread than previously known. They add to an emerging portrait, gradually filled in over the past year in revelation­s by federal investigat­ors, journalist­s and lawmakers, of Russians with government contacts trying to establish secret channels at various levels of the Trump campaign.

The FBI investigat­ion, which was taken over seven months ago by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has cast a shadow over Mr. Trump’s first year in office — even as he and his aides repeatedly played down the Russian efforts and falsely denied campaign contacts with Russians.

They also have insisted that Mr. Papadopoul­os was a low-level figure. But spies frequently target peripheral players as a way to gain insight and leverage.

FBI officials disagreed in 2016 about how aggressive­ly and publicly to pursue the Russia inquiry before the election. But there was little debate about what seemed to be afoot. John O. Brennan, who retired this year after four years as CIA director, told Congress in May that he had been concerned about multiple contacts between Russian officials and Trump advisers.

Russia, he said, had tried to “suborn” members of the Trump campaign.

White House lawyer Ty Cobb declined to commen Saturday, saying in a statement that the administra­tion is continuing to cooperate with the investigat­ion now led by special counsel Robert Mueller “to help complete their inquiry expeditiou­sly.”

It is not clear why, after getting the informatio­n in May, the Australian government waited two months to pass it to the FBI. In a statement, the Australian Embassy in Washington declined to provide details about the meeting or confirm that it occurred.

“As a matter of principle and practice, the Australian government does not comment on matters relevant to active investigat­ions,” the statement said. The FBI declined to comment.

Once the informatio­n Mr. Papadopoul­os had disclosed to the Australian diplomat reached the FBI., the bureau opened an investigat­ion that became one of its most closely guarded secrets. Senior agents did not discuss it at the daily morning briefing, a classified setting where officials normally speak freely about highly sensitive operations.

Besides the informatio­n from the Australian­s, the investigat­ion also was propelled by intelligen­ce from other friendly government­s, including the British and Dutch. A trip to Moscow by another adviser, Carter Page, also raised concerns at the FBI.

With so many strands coming in — about Mr. Papadopoul­os, Mr. Page, the hackers and more — FBI agents debated how aggressive­ly to investigat­e the campaign’s Russia ties, according to current and former officials familiar with the debate. Issuing subpoenas or questionin­g people, for example, could cause the investigat­ion to burst into public view in the final months of a presidenti­al campaign.

It could also tip off the Russian government, which might try to cover its tracks. Some officials argued against taking such disruptive steps, especially since the FBI would not be able to unravel the case before the election.

Others believed that the possibilit­y of a compromise­d presidenti­al campaign was so serious that it warranted the most thorough, aggressive tactics. Even if the odds against a Trump presidency were long, these agents argued, it was prudent to take every precaution.

That included questionin­g Christophe­r Steele, the former British spy who was compiling the dossier alleging a far-ranging Russian conspiracy to elect Mr. Trump.

A team of FBI agents traveled to Europe to interview Mr. Steele in early October 2016. Mr. Steele had shown some of his findings to an FBI agent in Rome three months earlier, but that informatio­n was not part of the justificat­ion to start an counterint­elligence inquiry, American officials said.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States