|7th Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation|
From: September 4, 2013 – May 9, 2017
|Predecessor||Robert S. Mueller|
|Successor||Andrew McCabe (acting)|
James Brien Comey Jr. (December 14, 1960) is a former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) appointed by Barack Obama on September 4, 2013, and a lawyer. Comey is suspected of obstruction of justice in whitewashing the Hillary Clinton email scandal. Comey has admitted to leaking information about a confidential discussion he had with President Donald Trump.
As Director, Comey colluded with the Clinton campaign to smear Donald Trump and associates through an organization known as FusionGPS which at the same time was acting as a foreign agent of the Russian government. In April 2018 Comey was referred to the Justice Department for criminal investigation and prosecution.
Comey is considered by many as the most corrupt FBI Director since J. Edgar Hoover. The FISA courts were established after Hoover's death to bring judicial oversight to the FBI and limit abuse. Under James Comey, the FBI circumvented the FISA court, and engaged in domestic political spying and election interference.
Personal life and career
Between December 9, 2003, and August 15, 2005, he served as United States Deputy Attorney General under the administration of president George W. Bush.
Comey once was a member of the Republican Party but later became an independent. However, his wife and daughters attended the left-wing, anti-Trump Women's March and supported Hillary Clinton. Comey built his career and reputation among leftists prosecuting the cases of Martha Stewart, Steven Hatfield (the Anthrax case), Scooter Libby, and Dinesh D'Souza.
Hillary Clinton email investigation
- Main article: Hillary Clinton email investigation
During the presidential elections in 2016, Comey investigated the Hillary Clinton email scandal, which has been seen as a main factor of her loss. Despite damning evidence and in violation of departmental rules, Comey publicly stated the FBI could find no cause to recommend prosecution only to be forced to re-open the case days before the election. Clinton blamed Comey for her failed campaign.
President Obama exchanged emails with Secretary Clinton and knew of her use of an illegal server prior to the time he said he learned of it. In early May 2016 Comey emailed his draft statement exonerating Secretary Clinton to FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, FBI General Counsel James Baker, and FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki. The reference to communicating with "the President" in the revised draft was changed to “another senior government official". However, in Comey’s final public statement, even the reference to “another senior government official” was blotted out as too incriminating, and stricken altogether. Section 793(f) of the Espionage Act prohibits having knowledge, and failing to report, the existence of national defense documents that are mishandled through gross negligence. Comey never made a truthful and accurate report to Congress about his findings. Gross negligence in handling classified information is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
Comey met with President Obama on the morning of May 16, 2016; by afternoon his revised draft was circulating among McCabe, Baker, Rybicki, Peter Strzok, Bill Priestap, Trisha Anderson, Johnathan Moffa, David Bowdich and others. Obama intervened in the investigation when he publicly stated that Hillary Clinton showed “carelessness” in using a private e-mail server. Strzok struck Comey's original finding, "grossly negligent", and inserted Obama's "extremely careless."
Comey never investigated Hillary's willful destruction of documents. Comey later admitted the investigation was driven by politics, and not the law, a desire to clear Hillary Clinton so she could win the Democratic nomination for president.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wrote in a performance review of Comey's behavior,
"The director was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016, and announce his conclusion that the case should be closed without prosecution.
It is not the function of the Director to make such an announcement. At most, the Director should have said the FBI had completed its investigation and presented its findings to federal prosecutors. The Director now defends his decision by asserting that he believed attorney General Loretta Lynch had a conflict. But the FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the Justice Department. There is a well-established process for other officials to step in when a conflict requires the recusal of the Attorney General. On July 5, however, the Director announced his own conclusions about the nation's most sensitive criminal investigation, without the authorization of duly appointed Justice Department leaders.
Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation. Derogatory information sometimes is disclosed in the course of criminal investigations and prosecutions, but we never release it gratuitously. The Director laid out his version of the facts for the news media as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do.In response to skeptical question at a congressional hearing, the Director defended his remarks by saying that his "goal was to say what is true. What did we do, what did we find, what do we think about it." But the goal of a federal criminal investigation is not to announce our thoughts at a press conference. The goal is to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to justify a federal criminal prosecution, then allow a federal prosecutor who exercises authority delegated by the Attorney General to make a prosecutorial decision, and then - if prosecution is warranted - let the judge and jury determine the facts. We sometimes release information about closed investigations in appropriate ways, but the FBI does not do it sua sponte."
Lying to Congress
Comey testified his decision not to recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton came after her July 2, 2016 interview with FBI investigators Peter Strzok and David Laufman. FBI Documents reveal Comey decided more than six weeks earlier before the investigation was completed.
Mr. RATCLIFFE. ...If there was ever any possibility that something Hillary Clinton might have said on July 2 could have possibly resulted in criminal charges that might possibly have resulted in a trial against her relating to this classified information, well, then, to use your words, Director, I don’t think that there is any reasonable prosecutor out there who would have allowed two immunized witnesses central to the prosecution proving the case against her to sit in the room with the interview, the FBI interview, of the subject of that investigation.
And if I heard you earlier today, in your long career, I heard you say that you have never had that circumstance. Is that—did I hear you correctly?
Mr. COMEY. That is correct, but——
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Okay. And I never have either, and I have never met a prosecutor that has ever had that.
So, to me, the only way that an interview takes place with the two central witnesses and the subject of the investigation is if the decision has already been made that all three people in that room are not going to be charged.
Mr. COMEY. Can I respond?
Mr. RATCLIFFE. Yes. Please.
Mr. COMEY. I know in our political lives sometimes people casually accuse each other of being dishonest, but if colleagues of ours believe I am lying about when I made this decision, please urge them to contact me privately so we can have a conversation about this.All I can do is to tell you again, the decision was made after that, because I didn’t know what was going to happen in that interview...
Comey faces charges of violating 18 USC 1621 and 18 USC 1001.
On October 28, ten days before the 2016 presidential election, Comey was forced to go public with re-opening the Clinton email investigation when the New York Police Department (NYPD) planned a press conference about evidence they seized on Anthony Weiner's laptop computer. 650,000 classified State Department emails and other damning evidence was found.
Re-opening Hillary's email case threw the Clinton campaign and poll numbers into a tailspin.Comey later explained
he felt obligated to take more of a personal role as the public face of the investigation rather than deferring to then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch – in part because of something involving Lynch that he cryptically refers to as a “development still unknown to the American public to this day.”The Weiner/Abedin/Clinton laptop evidence was turned over by NYPD to the DOJ Southern District of New York (SDNY). Previously a grand jury in New York refused to return an indictment against the NY police in the Eric Garner case. Garner was killed in police custody while put in a chokehold. As an outcome of that grand jury finding, and of their own investigation, the Eastern District of New York (EDNY) was not pursuing criminal charges against NYPD officers involved. Federal prosecutors in the Washington D.C. DOJ Civil Rights Division argued there was clear evidence to bring charges, whereas FBI officials and the DOJ EDNY opposed bringing any charges.
Loretta Lynch threatened to take the Garner case away from the Brooklyn Eastern District of New York (EDNY) and give it to Preet Bharara of the Manhattan South District of New York (SDNY) if the NYPD went public with the evidence they found on the Weiner laptop. Lynch used the Justice Department to threaten NYPD into sitting on its evidence in the Weiner case to protect Hillary Clinton.
Trump Russia investigation
- Main article: Trump-Russia investigation
The law requires the FBI Director to notify the Gang of Eight Congressional leaders of any surveillance of American citizens authorised by the FISA court every 90 days. In addition to hoaxing the FISA court into granting a FISA warrant on Trump associates with false evidence manufactured by Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, Comey never fulfilled his legal obligation to apprise Congressional leaders of both parties about the FBI's clandestine activities.
In a meeting during Trump's transition, Comey asked others present to leave the room so he could present the Democrat opposition research to Trump as a US "intelligence product" in an effort to blackmail Trump. In sordid Congressional testimony after his firing, Comey claimed he thought it was unusual or improper weeks later when Trump asked him for a one-on-one meeting.
After whitewashing Hillary Clinton's widely known criminality so she could secure the Democratic nomination against Bernie Sanders, Comey refused to lift the cloud of innuendo over President Trump generated by the collusion between Democrat opposition researchers and the FBI, despite pleas from Congress and Comey's own private admissions that Trump was not under criminal investigation.
Comey, Clapper and BrennanDuring the Trump transition on January 5, 2017 DNI James Clapper, DCI John Brennan, Comey, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, President Obama, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and Vice President Biden met in the Oval Office. The Clinton-Steele dossier was discussed. Susan Rice made a note of the discussion.
President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the intelligence and law enforcement communities "by the book". The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.At the conclusion of the briefing, Obama held Sally Yates and Comey aside. The 90-day surveillance period under the secret FISA warrant had just over two weeks remaining — it was set to expire just as Trump was taking office. The Obama administration was facing a deadline if the secret FISA warrant was to be renewed before Obama lefts office. They needed to figure out how the investigation could continue as Trump was sworn in as president. Rice’s “by the book” comment is transparent: Obama claimed to adhere to a book that forbade consultations between political officials and civil service investigators. But here they were consulting. So Rice tried to cover their tracks in her CYA email: She revises history such that the consultation morphs into a mere friendly reminder that Obama wanted everything done by the book.
From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.
The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would."
The next morning CIA Director Brennan released an unclassified version of the Joint Analysis Report, a joint Comey, Clapper and Brennan document consisting of recycled reports on Russia Today (RT) with 2 pages of sexual innuendo from the Clinton-Steele dossier. NSA Dir. Adm. Mike Rogers dissented from the report. The Washington Post was assured that "the sources involved in the [Clinton-Steele dossier's] reporting were credible enough to warrant inclusion in the highly classified [presidential] report.” Brennan however in later public testimony said the dossier and its sources were not credible enough to incorporate in the Joint Analysis Report on Russian election interference. Brennan swore the Clinton-Steele dossier did not “in any way” factor into the CIA's assessment that Russia interfered in the election to help Trump. The classified version of Comey, Clapper and Brennan's Joint Analysis Report congressional investigators found contradicts Brennan's sworn testimony.
The same day of the release Comey, Clapper, Brennan, and Adm. Rogers traveled to New York to brief President-elect Trump on the Joint Analysis Report. Comey asked for a one-on-one briefing with Trump at the end of the meeting. Without informing Trump of the true origins which Comey knew was Democrat and Clinton opposition talking points, Comey represented the "salacious" allegations to Trump as some sort of official US government intelligence report. It fundamentally was an effort by Comey to blackmail the new president, as J. Edgar Hoover had done with the seven president's Hoover served under over his 47-year career, which is why Congress limited the term of future directors and created judicial oversight of the FBI by the FISA court.
In his Congressional testimony Comey swore the dossier was "salacious and unverifed" although the FBI/DOJ used it to obtain FISA surveillance warrants on the Trump campaign in October 2016.
The Obama administration for the first time since the Watergate reforms of the 1970s successfully carried out what Richard Nixon attempted but failed to do - use the FBI and CIA to spy on, harass, and violate the civil rights of domestic political opponents. Comey did not inform Trump of the FISA surveillance on the Trump campaign and transition team - Carter Page, Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, Mike Flynn and others, only the manufactured sexual innuendo by Hillary Clinton's hirelings. According to Comey, he acted on the instructions of Brennan and Clapper,  and not President Obama after the day prior Oval Office meeting. "[T]he leaders of the intelligence community agreed [Trump] needed to be told about because we knew it and thought it was about to become public."
On January 10, 2017 Obama DNI Clapper leaked to Jake Tapper the briefing on the Clinton campaign's allegations that Trump consorted with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel, creating the "news hook" CNN was looking for to justify reporting details. An hour later CNN linked to BuzzFeed making the Clinton-Steele dossier public. The Clinton opposition research was broadcast to the public as some sort of official "intelligence report" with mysterious origins that the Obama administration was acting on. Simultaneously Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was meeting secretly with FusionGPS boss Glenn Simpson. FusionGPS was paid $1,024,408 to create the false allegations. Trump responded "I win an election easily, a great "movement" is verified, and crooked opponents try to belittle our victory with FAKE NEWS. A sorry state! … Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to ‘leak’ into the public. One last shot at me. Are we living in Nazi Germany?” Trump stated that he was not briefed on the full contents the Clinton-Steele dossier or its origins. NBC News independently verified Trump's account, as did FOX News. Clapper issued a press release moments later stating that he only now, that evening, not four days earlier on January 6, discussed the Clinton-Steele dossier with Trump.
Jake Tapper reported that government sources confirmed it was the wrong "Michael Cohen" who allegedly travelled to Prague to pay the KGB to hack into the DNC as the Democrat talking points contend, further debunking the Steele dossier.
On January 13 Chuck Ross of the Daily Caller identified the group Hillary Clinton hired - FusionGPS, Christopher Steele's employer, and Glenn Simpson its founder - as the same group that colluded with Russia during the 2016 campaign to repeal Russian sanctions, the Magnitsky Act. Ross stated that part of Simpson’s work involved passing stories to his deep network of journalism contacts in order to undermine the law.
FiringImmediately after being fired, Comey began leaking the substance of private confidential information shared with the president to the New York Times. Five days later more appeared. Jake Novak of CNBC commented the latest Trump-Russia leaks sounded like a coup attempt. Novak noted
"Someone at the highest levels of government has leaked information to the news media about President Trump's discussions with Russian officials...candidate Donald Trump indeed insulted the intelligence community during the election, and many have concluded that this is their plotted revenge...we have some very powerful people in Washington who really don't like how democracy played out this time around and what they do to attack it next isn't going to be any better than what they're doing now."
On June 8 in sworn testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey admitted to wrongdoing in leaking information relevant to an FBI investigation to the media. Comey claimed he was motivated by Trump tweets, although the first leak was published on May 11, 2017 before Trump tweeted, raising yet again another instance where Comey may have misled Congress in his sworn testimony.
As a result of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's review, a referral from Congress, and the appointment of federal prosecutor John Huber, Barack Obama's choice to lead the nation's premier law enforcement agency, is now facing criminal prosecution.
Comey faces charges for:
- improper investigative conduct possibly with a political motivation in the Clinton email case. Comey publicly admitted Hillary Clinton had broken the law yet refused to bring charges.
- leaking classified information.
- lying to Congress about (a) deciding not to recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton until after she was interviewed by the FBI; and (b) material inconsistencies between information provided in briefings to Congress about the FBI's relationship with Christopher Steele and information in Justice Department documents.
"the president of the United States is accusing people of crimes without evidence and pronouncing them guilty and saying they should be in jail. That should wake all of us up."Yet Comey refused to state publicly that President Trump was not under FBI criminal investigation, despite saying so privately, and the injunction of Congressional leaders to say so publicly. It was the smears of Clinton's opposition research dressed up as intelligence reports, Obama administration leaks, and Comey himself working with FusionGPS, that left hanging a cloud of innuendo upon President Trump which Comey knew to be false. Additionally, Comey apologist George Stephanopoulos was White House Communications Director under Bill Clinton, coordinating media attacks on "bimbos" and "nuts and sluts" to cover-up sexual assaults Bill Clinton had been accused of.
- FBI scandal
- Obamagate timeline 2009-2015
- Obamagate timeline 2016 election year
- Russiagate timeline 2017
- Russiagate timeline 2018
- Deep state coup
- Samuels, Brett (April 15, 2018). Comey's wife and daughters took part in Women's March, supported Clinton. The Hill. Retrieved April 15, 2018.
- The Espionage Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 793-798, prohibits various types of mishandling of “national defense information.” Section 793(f) prohibits the mishandling of classified material through one’s gross negligence. This subsection does not require a specific intent to harm national security, and even without intent, it is considered a serious crime.
- "in April, 2016, President Obama gave an interview in which he seemed to have foreknowledge that Hillary Clinton would be exonerated for her “carelessness” and did not “intentionally” mishandle classified emails, words that Comey would use just a few months later...In an interview on “Fox News Sunday,” Mr. Obama seemed to prejudge the outcome of the ongoing inquiry into Mrs. Clinton’s email scandal, and he disputed the notion that any of the emails contained classified information of true importance. "She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy,” he said. “What I also know is that there’s classified and then there’s classified. There’s stuff that is really top secret top secret, and then there’s stuff that is being presented to the president, the secretary of state, you may not want going out over the wire.”…
...we now see how Obama’s pledge that politics would not taint the investigation was a bald-faced lie. This confidence in her exoneration was shared by Mrs. Clinton, who also seemed to have foreknowledge that the fix was in: The FBI is investigating the matter, and while Mrs. Clinton has virtually promised she will not be indicted, the scandal still hangs over her presidential ambitions...“That is not going to happen,” she told NBC News when asked if she would be indicted. “There is not even the remotest chance that it’s going to happen.”
National Review Contributing Editor Andrew McCarthy has long argued that Obama was the ringleader in obstructing justice in the Hillary email investigation: "From the first, these columns have argued that the whitewash of the Hillary Clinton-emails caper was President Barack Obama’s call -- not the FBI’s, and not the Justice Department’s… The decision was inevitable. Obama, using a pseudonymous email account, had repeatedly communicated with Secretary Clinton over her private, non-secure email account....If Clinton had been charged, Obama’s culpable involvement would have been patent. In any prosecution of Clinton, the Clinton -- Obama emails would have been in the spotlight. For the prosecution, they would be more proof of willful (or, if you prefer, grossly negligent) mishandling of intelligence. More significantly, for Clinton’s defense, they would show that Obama was complicit in Clinton’s conduct yet faced no criminal charges."
...a draft dated June 30, 2016 (i.e., five days before Comey delivered the final version), contained a passage expressly referring to a troublesome email exchange between Clinton and Obama. (I note that the FBI’s report of its eventual interview of Clinton contains a cryptic reference to a July 1, 2012, email that Clinton sent from Russia to Obama’s email address. See report, page 2.) The passage in the June 30 draft stated: We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including from the territory of sophisticated adversaries. That use included an email exchange with the President while Secretary Clinton was on the territory of such an adversary. [Emphasis added.] Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.
On the same day, according to a Strzok–Page text, a revised draft of Comey’s remarks was circulated by his chief of staff, Jim Rybicki. It replaced “the President” with “another senior government official.” So not only were edits made to Comey’s draft memo to hide Hillary’s guilt but also Obama’s involvement.
From the Strzok-Page text messages we know that Loretta Lynch knew Hillary would not be prosecuted. That meeting on the tarmac was to tell Bill Clinton the fix was in, a fix whose impetus came from the White House and an occupant concerned with both his legacy being erased by a President Trump but also by his involvement in covering up Hillary’s crimes....
This is Watergate on steroids. Not only do we have one party colluding with government agencies to keep its candidate from being prosecuted for her crimes and preventing the election of the other party’s candidate, but we also have a sitting and corrupt President using the powers of his office to subvert an election and hand-pick his successor.
- Shaw, Adam (October 18, 2017). James Comey Drafted Statement Ending Hillary Clinton Email Probe Months Before Interviewing Her. Breitbart News. Retrieved October 18, 2017.
- OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION, SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 page 88 PDF
- 4. One of the seventeen reports in the Dossier—CIR 112—accused the Plaintiffs of criminal conduct and participation in an alleged Trump-Russia scheme to influence the 2016 presidential election. Defendants knew that this Report was not verified, and that it defamed Plaintiffs on its face. Defendants could easily have removed that Report from the Dossier before they started peddling the Dossier to media and journalists in September and October 2016. They chose not to do so. Nor did they attempt to determine the veracity of that Report with the Plaintiffs themselves. 5. At all times during the Defendants’ engagement of Orbis and Steele, it was either intended or clearly foreseeable that the Dossier’s contents would be republished (in whole or in part) to third parties, either by the Defendants themselves or their clients. Indeed, that is the entire purpose of “oppo research” in politics. Those third parties included government officials, as well as news media and journalists who could make its content public. 6. On information and belief, Defendants arranged for Steele to brief selected members of the print and online media about the information he was compiling on candidate Trump. Consistent with the intended purpose of “oppo research” to publicly discredit its target, Steele’s briefings were designed to generate interest in the Dossier and secure its eventual public dissemination. Briefings were held for journalists from the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, Yahoo News, and others in September 2016. Shortly thereafter, Yahoo News published an article by Michael Isikoff that described some of the content of the Dossier (referred to there as “intelligence reports” and “reports”), which was still being compiled at that time.1 Many other media articles reported speculative accounts of the Dossier’s existence and contents. In October 2016, Steele was interviewed by David Corn, a writer for Mother Jones, which on October 31, 2016 published an article headlined “A Veteran Spy Has Given The FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump.”2 The Corn article stated that it had “reviewed” the early reports in the Dossier, and then quoted from those reports as well as statements made by Steele in the interview. The public dissemination of the Dossier’s content had begun in earnest. 7. In addition to cultivating media interest, the Defendants also organized or approved a meeting in Great Britain between Steele and David Kramer, a director of a private foundation led by U.S. Senator John McCain. The purpose of that meeting was to brief Kramer on behalf of Senator McCain, who at the time was an outspoken critic of Trump’s candidacy. Subsequently, in November 2016, Defendants provided a copy of the Dossier’s first sixteen reports, including the Report that falsely accused and defamed Plaintiffs, to Kramer for redelivery to Senator McCain. 8. As the 2016 presidential election neared, both print and online media in the United States and abroad began to expand their coverage of the Dossier and its alleged content. That coverage only intensified after Trump won the election. On January 10, 2017, one of those media entities, BuzzFeed, Inc., published the entire Dossier on the Internet, describing it as “explosive.” The copy of the Dossier that BuzzFeed published included the false and defamatory allegations about the Plaintiffs and Alfa, along with an article entitled “These Reports Allege Trump Has Deep Ties to Russia.”3 The Dossier misspells Alfa’s name throughout, incorrectly spelling it as “Alpha.” In a recent court filing, Fusion admitted that it had “pre-publication” communications with BuzzFeed about its publication.4 9. The Defendants intended, anticipated, or foresaw a high likelihood that allowing their clients and/or the media access to the Dossier’s defamatory content would result in its republication by news media outlets, including online news media such as BuzzFeed. 10. Plaintiffs seek an award of compensatory and punitive damages for the harm to their personal and professional reputations, current business interests, and the impairment of business opportunities that resulted from the blatantly false and defamatory statements and implications about them published by the Defendants and republished by BuzzFeed and countless other media around the world. FRIDMAN et al v. BEAN LLC et al https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/22639671/FRIDMAN_et_al_v_BEAN_LLC_et_al https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Dossier.pdf
- "to remove the name “Magnitsky” from the Global Magnitsky Act, delay the bills passage, and cast doubt on the Justice Dept.’s version of events prior to the passage of the Magnitsky Act. The defrauded complaintant referred to Simpson, who was hired by the Clinton campaign and DNC as "a professional smear campaigner.” “Glenn Simpson knowingly spread false information on behalf of people connected to the Russian government to try to protect Russian torturers and murderers from consequences.” http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/13/exclusive-oppo-researcher-behind-trump-dossier-is-linked-to-pro-kremlin-lobbying-effort/
- Ross's article expounds: The main proponent of that law, a British-American businessman named Bill Browder, tells DC..."Glenn Simpson’s job was to knowingly and dishonestly change the narrative of how Sergei Magnitsky came to die from murder to natural causes, and to change the narrative that Sergei Magnitsky was a criminal and not a whistleblower," ... Magnitsky, who helped Browder investigate many of the corrupt Russian firms, was arrested in Nov. 2008 and accused of engaging in fraud and tax evasion. Magnitsky was tortured for months in a Russian prison and deprived of medical treatment, all in order to elicit a false confession that he and Browder were engaged in fraud and tax evasion, Browder has alleged. After Magnitsky’s health deteriorated, he was transferred to another jail. There, the lawyer was allegedly beaten with blunt objects by prison guards. He died on Nov. 16, 2009 at the age of 37. Soon after his friend’s murder, Browder began lobbying American lawmakers — Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin and Arizona Sen. John McCain, in particular — to pass a law that would provide a mechanism to punish Kremlin-linked Russian criminals. http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/16/think-tank-appears-to-cut-ties-with-oppo-researcher-behind-trump-dossier/#ixzz4d5c0xHTC