Durham Indictment Of Danchenko Casts New Scrutiny On Democrats Who Hyped Steele Dossier


Special Counsel John Durham’s indictment of Igor Danchenko, a Russian analyst believed to be the source of Christopher Steele’s dossier, has cast new scrutiny on the Democrats who previously hyped the debunked document.


Danchenko is believed to be the sub-source for former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, who compiled the dossier that served as the basis for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants against Trump campaign aide Carter Page. The dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign through law firm Perkins Coie.

The Steele dossier alleged that former President Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election and claimed that the Kremlin had blackmail material on the former president, among other assertions.

According to the indictment, in March, May, June, October and November of 2017, Danchenko made false statements regarding the sources of certain information that he provided to a U. K. investigative firm that was then included in reports prepared by the U.K. investigative firm and subsequently passed to the FBI.

Several Democrats, including House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., consistently promoted the infamous dossier that alleged former President Donald Trump colluded with the Russian government to win the 2016 election.

The dossier was central to Democratic attempts to tie Trump to Russian attempts to influence the election, but has been thoroughly debunked, including by special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

One of the loudest voices promoting the dossier was Schiff, who voraciously defended the document.

“Unilateral subpoenas issued by House Intel Majority appear to be part of effort to discredit Steele, rather than determine truth of dossier,” Schiff tweeted in 2017.

Sponsored Links

“We certainly want to get to the bottom of the details of that dossier and report what has been substantiated, what hasn’t, and find… (Read more)

Comments are closed.