Robert Mueller’s “pitbull” rejected key portions of a New York Times story claiming the Justice Department secretly blocked the special counsel’s team from conducting a Trump-Russia counterintelligence investigation without informing the FBI.
Andrew Weissmann, who as a top prosecutor on Mueller’s special counsel team, pointed out “wrong” and “erroneous” assertions in a Sunday piece by New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt, whose article was adapted from his new book, Donald Trump v. The United States: Inside the Struggle to Stop a President. Mueller’s report and subsequent congressional testimony also seem to contradict some claims made by the New York Times.
“The Justice Department secretly took steps in 2017 to narrow the investigation into Russian election interference and any links to the Trump campaign, according to former law enforcement officials, keeping investigators from completing an examination of President Trump’s decades-long personal and business ties to Russia,” the New York Times reported on Sunday, adding the FBI opened the counterintelligence investigation in May 2017, but “within days,” former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein “curtailed the investigation without telling the bureau, all but ensuring it would go nowhere.”
In a pair of tweets, Weissmann said the newspaper was “wrong” in this regard.
“NYT story today is wrong re: alleged secret DOJ order prohibiting a counterintelligence investigation by Mueller, ‘without telling the bureau.’ Dozens of FBI agents/analysts were embedded in Special Counsel’s Office and we were never told to keep anything from them,” he tweeted.
Mueller’s report also seems to contradict the New York Times.
“From its inception, the Office recognized that its investigation could identify foreign intelligence and counterintelligence information relevant to the FBI’s broader national security mission. FBI personnel who assisted the Office established procedures to identify and convey such information to the FBI,” the 448-page report said. “The FBI’s Counterintelligence Division met with the Office regularly for that purpose for most of the Office’s tenure. For more than the past year, the FBI also embedded personnel at the Office who did not work on the Special Counsel’s investigation, but whose purpose was to review the results of the investigation and to send — in writing — summaries of foreign intelligence and counterintelligence information to FBIHQ and FBI Field Offices.”
The New York Times also reported that Rosenstein “concluded the FBI lacked sufficient reason to conduct an investigation into the president’s links to a foreign adversary.” But Weissmann said that was “also erroneous” and pointed to Rosenstein’s order appointing Mueller in May 2017, which stated Mueller was “authorized” to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” and “any matters that arose or may arise directly.”
Schmidt did not respond to the Washington Examiner’s questions about Weissmann contradicting the paper’s story and Mueller’s own words casting doubt on it. New York Times director of communications Ari Isaacman Bevacqua said, “We stand by our reporting.”
Trump’s critics have re-raised concerns in recent weeks about whether Trump’s possible financial ties to Russia were investigated by the FBI after acting Director Andrew McCabe approved opening a counterintelligence investigation into Trump after James Comey was fired.
McCabe, who, the following year, was fired after DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz concluded he “lacked candor” with investigators regarding a media leak related to an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation, was quoted in the New York Times piece.
“We opened this case in May 2017 because we had information that indicated a national security threat might exist, specifically a counterintelligence threat involving the president and Russia,” he said. “I expected that issue and issues related to it would be fully examined by the special counsel team. If a decision was made not to investigate those issues, I am surprised and disappointed.”
The New York Times further reported that “Mr. Rosenstein never told Mr. McCabe about his decision, leaving the FBI with the impression that the special counsel would take on the investigation into the president as part of his broader duties,” and “Mr. McCabe said in an interview that had he known Mr. Mueller would not continue the inquiry, he would have had the FBI perform it.”
McCabe also criticized Rosenstein over the deputy attorney general’s disputed actions on CNN’s New Day on Monday morning. Rosenstein declined to comment.
But Mueller’s report and testimony before the House Intelligence Committee last July cast doubt on the idea that Rosenstein or the Justice Department secretly curtailed Mueller. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi asked whether Mueller obtained Trump’s tax returns or whether Trump’s personal finances were “outside the purview” of his investigation. Mueller declined to answer. But when Krishnamoorthi asked if Mueller was ever instructed not to investigate Trump’s financials, Mueller said, “No.” Mueller confirmed he hadn’t looked into any potential Trump deals in Russia aside from the since-abandoned Trump Tower Moscow project.
During an interview with the New York Times in July 2017, Schmidt asked Trump if Mueller looking into his finances would be a “red line.” Trump replied, “yeah,” before saying, “I don’t make money from Russia.” CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin’s book, True Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Investigation of Donald Trump, said Mueller didn’t pursue Trump’s finances.
The special counsel told Congress his office “did not reach what you would call counterintelligence conclusions.” Mueller said there were FBI agents and analysts “whose job it was to identify counterintelligence information in our files and disseminate that information to the FBI.” Mueller said, “Questions about what the FBI has done with the counterintelligence information obtained from our investigation should be directed to the FBI.”
The FBI told the Washington Examiner last summer it would neither confirm nor deny any investigations. The FBI directed the Washington Examiner to the Justice Department on Monday, and the Justice Department didn’t respond.
The Senate Intelligence Committee report released earlier this month “look[ed] at many aspects of the counterintelligence threat posed by the Russian influence operation.” The Democratic “additional views” section alleged the investigation “did not seek, and was not able to review, records regarding Donald Trump’s finances and the numerous areas where those financial interests appear to have overlapped with Russia.”
Mueller concluded Russia interfered in 2016 in a “sweeping and systematic fashion” but “did not establish” any criminal conspiracy between Russia and Trump’s campaign. U.S. Attorney John Durham is conducting an investigation into the origins and conduct of the Trump-Russia investigation.
