Carter Page, briefly an associate of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, expressed confidence Monday in his “extensive discussions” with the FBI about Russia and the campaign, even as he faces increasing scrutiny.
Page runs an energy investment firm in Manhattan, and was mentioned by Trump as doing consulting work in foreign affairs for the campaign, but the depth of Page’s involvement with the campaign has been a subject of debate.
Page agreed to be interviewed by FBI agents five times, all without an attorney present, according to a report by the Washington Post Monday.
Like Trump, Page has said that the investigation into his dealings with Russia have been a witch hunt, and told the Washington Examiner earlier this month he had been, “completely blocked from testifying before either of the congressional intelligence committees and providing the accurate story about what actually happened last year.”
The Post described Page’s FBI interview as “the most extensive known questioning of a potential suspect in the probe of possible Russian connections to associates of President Trump.”
According to media reports, the FBI began surveillance of Page sometime in the latter half of 2016, obtaining a warrant based in part on contents of the so-called “Steele dossier,” which was an opposition research document compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele. The dossier also played a prominent part in questioning by Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee in their first open hearing into the Russian meddling in the 2016 elections in March, about the same time Page was being interviewed.
However, two reports emerged on Monday which raised new questions about the creation of the dossier, and how extensively it may have been relied upon by the FBI. The Senate Judiciary Committee has also threatened to subpoena documents from the firm which employed Steel, Fusion GPS.
When asked for comment, Page told the Washington Examiner:
During extensive discussions with the FBI agents just weeks before Comey’s departure, they acknowledged that I’m a loyal American veteran but indicated that their ‘management’ was concerned that I did not believe the conclusions of the fake January 6 intelligence report.
I told them that I learned the lessons from the intelligence failures of the original Dodgy Dossier from 2003 which cost this country thousands of service member’s lives and over a trillion dollars.
Our frank and open conversations gave me confidence that there are still logical, honest individuals at the bureau who respect civil rights and the Constitution, despite the recent devastating impact on our democracy by self-centered politicians at the top of the Clinton-Obama-Comey regime.
Page’s mention of the “fake January 6 intelligence report” refers to one of the earliest consensus reports produced by U.S. intelligence agencies on the Russian efforts to influence the 2016 elections.
The 2003 dossier he referenced is the British intelligence dossier which was relied upon in the U.K’s decision to support the American invasion of Iraq.
That 2003 intelligence document later became known pejoritavely as the “Dodgy Dossier,” and Page now applies the name to the Steel dossier.
In the March hearing by the House Intelligence Committee, numerous references were made to a portion of the Steele dossier which asserted Page had been offered a commission or broker’s fee to assist in the sale of a portion of the state-owned Russian gas company Rosneft.
Page told the Washington Examiner he was never offered anything to do with the sale, and claims it is more likely that there was collusion on the Rosneft sale with the Clinton campaign, because the company who bought the shares in the company was founded by Marc Rich, who was pardoned on the last day of Bill Clinton’s presidency.
Rich was deceased at the time of the sale.
