The chiefs of America’s intelligence agencies last week presented President Obama and President-elect Donald J. Trump
with a summary of unsubstantiated reports that Russia had collected
compromising and salacious personal information about Mr. Trump, two
officials with knowledge of the briefing said.
The summary is
based on memos generated by political operatives seeking to derail Mr.
Trump’s candidacy. Details of the reports began circulating in the fall
and were widely known among journalists and politicians in Washington.
The two-page summary, first reported by CNN, was presented as an appendix to the intelligence agencies’ report on Russian hacking efforts during the election,
the officials said. The material was not corroborated, and The New York
Times has not been able to confirm the claims. But intelligence
agencies considered it so potentially explosive that they decided Mr.
Obama, Mr. Trump and congressional leaders needed to be told about it
and informed that the agencies were actively investigating it.
Intelligence
officials were concerned that the information would leak before they
informed Mr. Trump of its existence, said the officials, who spoke on
the condition of anonymity because the summary is classified and talking
about it would be a felony.
On Tuesday night, Mr. Trump responded on Twitter: “FAKE NEWS - A TOTAL POLITICAL WITCH HUNT!”
In
an appearance recorded for NBC’s “Late Night with Seth Meyers,” Mr.
Trump’s spokeswoman, Kellyanne Conway, said of the claims in the
opposition research memos, “He has said he is not aware of that.”
Since
the intelligence agencies’ report on Friday that President Vladimir V.
Putin of Russia had ordered the hacking and leaks of Democratic emails
in order to hurt Mrs. Clinton and help Mr. Trump, the president-elect
and his aides have said that Democrats are trying to mar his election
victory.
The decision of top intelligence officials to give the
president, the president-elect and the so-called Gang of Eight —
Republican and Democratic leaders of Congress and the intelligence
committees — what they know to be unverified, defamatory material was
extremely unusual.
The appendix summarized opposition research
memos prepared mainly by a retired British intelligence operative for a
Washington political and corporate research firm. The firm was paid for
its work first by Mr. Trump’s Republican rivals and later by supporters
of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. The Times has checked on a
number of the details included in the memos but has been unable to
substantiate them.
The memos suggest that for many years, the
Russian government of Mr. Putin has looked for ways to influence Mr.
Trump, who has traveled repeatedly to Moscow to investigate real estate
deals or to oversee the Miss Universe competition, which he owned for
several years. Mr. Trump never completed any major deals in Russia,
though he discussed them for years.
The former British
intelligence officer who gathered the material about Mr. Trump is
considered a competent and reliable operative with extensive experience
in Russia, American officials said. But he passed on what he heard from
Russian informants and others, and what they told him has not yet been
vetted by American intelligence.
The memos describe sex videos
involving prostitutes with Mr. Trump in a 2013 visit to a Moscow hotel.
The videos were supposedly prepared as “kompromat,” or compromising
material, with the possible goal of blackmailing Mr. Trump in the
future.
The memos also suggest that Russian officials proposed
various lucrative deals, essentially as disguised bribes in order to win
influence over Mr. Trump.
The memos describe several purported
meetings during the 2016 presidential campaign between Trump
representatives and Russian officials to discuss matters of mutual
interest, including the Russian hacking of the Democratic National
Committee and Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman, John D. Podesta.
The
first hint of the F.B.I. investigation came in a Senate hearing on
Tuesday in a series of questions from Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of
Oregon, to the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey.
Mr. Wyden, trying
to draw Mr. Comey out on information he may have heard during a
classified briefing, asked whether the F.B.I. had investigated the Trump
campaign’s contacts with Russia. Mr. Comey demurred, saying he could
not discuss any investigations that might or might not be underway. Mr.
Wyden kept pressing, asking Mr. Comey to provide a written answer to the
question before Mr. Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, because he feared
there would be no declassification of the information once Mr. Trump
took office.
After the hearing, Mr. Wyden posted on Twitter: “Director Comey refused to answer my question about whether the FBI has investigated Trump campaign contacts with Russia.”
The
F.B.I. obtained the material long before the election, and some of the
memos in the opposition research dossier are dated as early as June. But
agents have struggled to confirm it, according to federal officials
familiar with the investigation.
Allies of Senator Harry Reid, the
Senate Democratic leader from Nevada who retired at the end of the
year, said the disclosures validated his call last summer for an
investigation by the F.B.I. into Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia.
“The
evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and
Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount,” Mr. Reid wrote
in a letter to Mr. Comey on Aug. 27.
Democrats on Tuesday night
pressed for a thorough investigation of the claims in the memos.
Representative Eric Swalwell of California, a member of the House
Intelligence Committee, called for law enforcement to find out whether
the Russian government had had any contact with Mr. Trump or his
campaign.
“The president-elect has spoken a number of times,
including after being presented with this evidence, in flattering ways
about Russia and its dictator,” Mr. Swalwell said. “Considering the
evidence of Russia hacking our democracy to his benefit, the
president-elect would do a service to his presidency and our country by
releasing his personal and business income taxes, as well as information
on any global financial holdings.”
No comments:
Post a Comment