From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

Pye R. Squared wrote:

"Cozy friendships: New Russiagate docs expose media-government collusion >Reporters 'scored a series of Pulitzer Prize-winning scoops in 2017 by >repeating false and inflammatory leaks during President Trump's first
term'"

https://www.wnd.com/2025/09/cozy-friendships-new-russiagate-docs-expose- >media-government/

"Recently declassified documents indicate that people close to former FBI >Director James Comey and Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff were connected to
leaks of classified information to prominent reporters designed to
portray Donald Trump and his allies as being in league with Russia.

Written in 2017, the FBI documents expose how selected Washington
reporters, including Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post and Michael >Schmidt of the New York Times, scored a series of Pulitzer Prize-winning >scoops in 2017 by repeating false and inflammatory leaks during President >Trump's first term.

Much of their reporting has been debunked rCo and shown to be part of a >smear campaign by high-ranking officials to undermine Trump, but the >identities of those leakers have remained hidden because of the
government's apparent unwillingness to expose its own and the refusal of >reporters to identify the people who misled them and the nation.

Although the heavily redacted recent disclosures do not specifically >identify the suspected leakers, an RCI analysis of the documents strongly >suggests that people close to Comey and Schiff, among others, were
feeding the reporters information to advance the Russiagate hoax.

The documents reveal a cascade of misdeeds and failures. These include
the effort of government officials to create and leak misleading
classified information to favored reporters and the failure of reporters
to scrutinize the information they were given before rushing it into
print; and the subsequent failure of federal investigators to hold anyone >accountable for the breaches of security.

The documents also detail the incestuous nature of media-government >relationships inside the D.C. Beltway. In some cases, spouses and friends
of government officials and reporters were used to spread damaging >misinformation about Trump, making it difficult for federal investigators
to follow the trail of illegal disclosures.

"All of these cozy friendships of leakers and leaker recipients, many of >whom are married to each other, are precisely why reporters adore hiding >their sourcing behind walls of 'senior administration officials' or
'senior U.S. officials' and associated disguises," said Tim Graham,
director of media analysis for the Media Research Center, a Washington-
based journalism watchdog group.

'Topple the Administration'

The new disclosures include the previously sealed testimony of an FBI >informant who'd worked on the Democratic side of the House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence for more than a decade, who told agents >that "all hell broke loose" after Trump's surprising 2016 election win.
In February 2017, he asserted, Schiff, then a House member, hatched a
plan to weaponize U.S. intelligence to smear Trump in the media as a
Kremlin conspirator with the goal of triggering his impeachment. Schiff
was the ranking Democratic member of the committee at the time.

"Leaking the information was one way to topple the administration," the >source told the FBI in August 2017, adding that "everything is directed
at Trump and trying to get him impeached."

To that end, Schiff formed a "Russia team" within the committee to view
and disseminate classified material on Trump that it requested from the
CIA and FBI, the informant said. Main team members allegedly included
Schiff staffers Rheanne Wirkkala and Timothy Bergreen. Schiff's staff >director, Michael Bahar, and his communications director, Patrick Boland, >allegedly "orchestrated" the smear campaign.

A spokesperson for Sen. Schiff "categorically" denied the allegation
against Boland, now Schiff's chief of staff, and claimed that the FBI >informant was "a disgruntled former staffer who was fired by the House >Intelligence Committee in early 2017 for a pattern of inappropriate
conduct, including mistreatment of staff and compromising activity on >foreign official travel."

Records, however, show the informant left the committee in September
2017, and had made his allegations to the FBI in interviews with agents
while he was still on staff, according to FBI-302 summaries.

Wirkkala, Bergreen and Bahar did not respond to requests for comment.

The FBI source, "who considered Schiff a friend," told agents that he was >called into the 2017 meeting during which Schiff specifically authorized >leaking classified "dirt" to reporters.

"In this meeting, SCHIFF stated that the group would leak classified >information which was derogatory to President of the United States Donald
J. Trump," said the FBI interview report, known as an FD-302, which noted >that the whistleblower memorialized the Monday, Feb. 13, 2017, staff
meeting in an email he sent to himself the next day.rC> "SCHIFF stated
the information would be used to indict President TRUMP."

Schiff has denied the allegations. The FBI subpoenaed some of the
California lawmaker's communications records, but never charged him with
a crime. (Schiff is currently under investigation for possible mortgage >fraud.)

The anonymous whistleblower rCo whose name is blacked out in the FBI >reports, but according to multiple sources is Robert Minehart rCo worked
as policy advisor to Schiff on the minority side of the intelligence >committee. He first joined the committee in 2005, after then-ranking >Democratic Rep. Jane Harman of CaliforniarC>recruitedrC>him from the
National Security Agency, where he worked as an engineer.

Minehart left the panel in laterC>2017 after he said Schiff loyalists >"marginalized" him for complaining to both the committee's security chief
and the CIA's inspector generalrC>about "the rampant leaking" of
classified information. He told FBI field agents he believed the
classified leaks were "unethical and treasonous," but was reluctant to >complain about them to the FBI congressional liaison office because he
viewed the officials there as "too embedded with HPSCI staff and cannot
trust them."

Former committee staffers who worked with Minehart said he was a well- >respected intelligence professional who was concerned with safeguarding >classified information. They viewed him as credible, reliable, and >nonpartisan.

"I remember Bob as a former NSArC>[engineer] who worked the NSA account
for the Democrats," said Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst who served
under former GOP House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers. "But
he was never part of the Democrat partisanship on the committee."

Federal Election Commission records show Minehart has donated to both >Democratic and Republican congressional candidates. Though he hasn't >contributed directly to any presidential campaign, he gave money to a PAC >tied to Trump in both 2022 and 2023. Attempts to reach Minehart,rC>now a >technology consultant based in Northern Virginia, were unsuccessful.

Leaking to the Press

Starting in 2016, FBI investigative documents show that Ellen Nakashima
was the go-to reporter for intelligence community leaks on Trump and
later became the subject of four separate leak investigations. In June of >that year, she broke the seminal story in the Washington Post, alleging
that "Russian government hackers penetrated DNC." This claim, which was
the first effort to insert Russia into the 2016 election, was advanced by
the Democratic cybersecurity contractor CrowdStrike. As RCI has
previously reported, CrowdStrike's president, Shawn Henry, >laterrC>confessedrC>in closed- door congressional testimony that
CrowdStrike lacked "concrete evidence" to support its finding that Moscow
was to blame for stealing emails and other DNC data published by
WikiLeaks. Nakashima, who reported that the DNC breach was foreign >"espionage" and not the work of criminal hackers, never revisited her >original story after contradictory facts emerged.

In early December 2016, Nakashima and her colleagues were leaked a
"secret CIA assessment" that found Russia was trying "to help Trump win
the White House," according to herrC>scoop. Nakashima reported that this
was the "consensus view" of the Intelligence Community, citing "a senior
U.S. official" who'd been briefed on the material. Nakashima quoted
Schiff at the end of her story. Later documents showed that there was no >consensus. Many CIA and other intel analysts dissented from the view and >believed Moscow's aim was simply to undermine confidence in U.S.
elections.

Less than three months after Trump took office, Nakashima was the lead >reporter on another seeming blockbusterrC>storyrC>advancing the Russian >"collusion" narrative pushed by Democrats rCo that the FBI had obtained a >wiretap warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to
monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page as "an agent of
Russia." FISA information is highly classified and almost never
disclosed. But Nakashima was the beneficiary of the unusual leak, and on >April 11, 2017, she reported: "This is the clearest evidence so far >thatrC>the FBI had reason to believe during the 2016 presidential
campaign that a Trump associate was in touch with Russian agents."

Only, it turns out that Page never met with the Russian agents, and the >wiretap warrant application rCo later invalidated by the FISA court rCo
was also based on the bogus Clinton-funded opposition research known as
the Steele dossier. She attributed her reporting to unnamed "U.S.
officials." Deep in her article, she once again quoted Schiff on the
record.

The Schiff staffers who allegedly funneled secrets to Nakashima gathered >them from CIA and FBI "read rooms" Schiff had asked the agencies to set
up, according to information provided to the FBI.

The documents indicate that some of therC>leaks may have been laundered >through a "cut-out" who happened to be the husband of a Schiff loyalist
on the Democratic staff of the House Intelligence Committee. The husband, >then a reporter for the Baltimore Sun, knew Nakashima from their days >working together at the Post.

Though their names are hidden under redactions, federal authorities >confirmed that the former Schiff staffer who allegedly divulged the >information is Rheanne Wirkkala, and the "cut-out" is her husband Ian >Duncan, then a reporter for the Sun.

"[Wirkkala]'s spouse has worked with Ellen Nakishima [sic] of the
Washington Post," the FBI report states. "[Wirkkala] provided information
to her husband who had brokered it out to other reporters," including >allegedly Nakashima.

A Democrat donor, Wirkkala alsorC>helpedrC>Schiff prosecute the first >impeachment of Trump in 2019 as his deputy director of investigations.

In 2021, Wirkkala left the House Intelligence Committee to take a high-
level Pentagon post in the Biden administration. She now works
forrC>Clarion Strategies, a D.C.-based consulting firm co-founded by
Julianne Smith, who appears in a recently declassified intelligence
report as the Hillary Clinton campaign adviser who solicited Obama White >House officials for compromising material on Trump and Russia in 2016. >President Obama's former Chief of Staff Denis McDonough is a principal in
the firm.

Wirkkala did not respond to requests for comment. Her husband, Duncan, is
now working at the Washington Post.

Records also show that Nakashima was also communicating with former
senior Senate Intelligence Committee staffer James Wolfe, who was >investigated for leaking classified materials on Trump aide Page and >ultimately convicted of lying to FBI agents about contacting Nakashima
and other reporters.

From December 2015 to June 2017, Nakashima and Wolfe exchanged emails at >least five times, according to court records. In one exchange, Nakashima >allegedly sent Wolfe a code to use in an encrypted messaging application.
In another, she allegedly discussed "obtaining the SSCI's public Wi-Fi >password."

During a March 2021 event addressing "National Security Leaks" rCo where
she shared the stage with a prime driver of the Russiagate hoax, former
CIA Director John Brennan rCo Nakashima dismissed complaints by media
critics that she acts as a "stenographer" for the Intelligence community. >"The public has a wildly inaccurate view of how I as a national security >reporter go about my job," she said at therC>symposium. "It's not that I
get a story because someone decided to leak it to me and hand it to me on
a silver platter."

In a recent statement, Post Executive Editor Matt Murray defended the >veteran reporter's integrity, asserting: "For three decades, Ellen
Nakashima has been one of the most careful, fair-minded, and highly
regarded reporters covering national security."

However, a former Washington Post colleague of Nakashima said that, like >many reporters who won Pulitzers for their Russiagate coverage, she was
too reliant on anti-Trump sources and is "too invested" in the fast- >unraveling story now to look back and reassess it with fresh eyes.

Noting that Nakashima has not cleared up the record by identifying her >sources in the intelligence community who fed her information that turned
out to be wrong or misleading, the former senior Post reporter said >Nakashima is protecting them, even as some of them fall under criminal >investigation for their role in perpetuating a massive fraud against the >president.

"She's running interference [for them], and worrying about her own
reporting looking bad," said the Post source, who spoke on the condition
of anonymity.

Cozy Relationship

A similarly cozy relationship was forged between Michael Schmidt of the
New York Times and Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman, a
close friend of Comey. After Trump fired Comey in 2017, the FBI documents >note, "Comey used Richman as a conduit to convey to the media memoranda
of his meetings with President Trump," which wererC>classified.

The newly released FBI memos reveal that Schmidt, who is married to anti- >Trump MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace, spent considerable time with Richman,
who was later investigated for leaking classified material to Schmidt. >Richman told the FBI he spoke to journalists "to correct stories critical
of Comey, [and] the FBI and to shape future press coverage." Richman told >agents "he did not know who gave Schmidt the classified information," but
he was "pretty sure" it wasn't him, before hedging that he was sure "with
a discount." He also claimed Comey "never asked" him to talk to the
media.

Like Nakashima, Schmidt credulously reported every angle of the
Russiagate investigation despite the paucity of "collusion" evidence.

One of those Times stories, "Comey Tried to Shield the F.B.I. From
Politics. Then He Shaped an Election," became the subject of a years-long >leak investigation. The April 22, 2017,rC>articlerC>gave a supposed
insider account of how Comey handled the investigations of Clinton's
email scandal and Russiagate during the 2016 election. But it was clearly >spun in Comey's favor. "Partisanship was not a factor in Mr. Comey's
approach to the two investigations," Schmidt wrote. "In the case of Mr. >Trump, he conducted the investigation by the book." In fact, two
independent investigations found serious misconduct in both probes.

FBI documents also reveal that former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa >Page made three separate trips to the New York Times in 2017 before the >Schmidt article was published rCo on March 10, March 30, and April 10 rCo
to provide "investigator-level" briefings to Times editors and reporters
rCo all concerning the same flattering story about Comey. They discussed >classified information during the briefings, the documents say.

Schmidt's May 2017rC>article, "Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End
Flynn Investigation," helped pressure the appointment of Special Counsel >Robert Mueller to take over the Russiagate case. Mueller focused on
potential obstruction, but in the end found no evidence for obstruction
or collusion.

Nonetheless, Schmidt's work was among the newspaper's 2018rC>Pulitzer- >winning storiesrC>on Russiagate. The three-way friendship between
Schmidt, his source, and the subject of his story was not disclosed to
the Pulitzer board rCo or the Times readership. "Schmidt visited
Richman's house numerous times," the FBI documents reveal.

A New York Times spokeswoman, Danielle Rhoades-Ha, said that the stories >using Richman as a source "raise no concerns about the accuracy of The >Times's reporting, which relied on multiple sources." Asked about the >veracity of reporting about Comey allegedly conducting the Russiagate >investigation "by the book," the Times did not respond. Richman was not >charged with perjury or leaking classified information. Neither was
Comey, although he is currently under investigation for possible false >statements to Congress.

Another Trump-Russia conspiracy reporter, Shane Harris, also allegedly >received classified intelligence from Schiff's committee when he worked
for the Wall Street Journal.

Whistleblower Allegations

The FBI whistleblower claimed that within 24 hours of Democratic House >intelligence panel member Eric Swalwell receiving a CIA document, some of
the information in it showed up "almost verbatim" in a July 1, >2017,rC>articlerC>by Harris that referred to "Russian hackers." Published >under the headline, "GOP Activist Who Sought Clinton Emails Cited Trump >Campaign Officials," the story by Harris and several colleagues cited as >sources, "U.S. officials with knowledge of the intelligence."

"[CIA] officials descended upon HPSCI's offices, threatening to stop >providing information unless the leaking ended," recounted the FBI's
summary of the whistleblower interview.

The committee whistleblower suspected Swalwell "played a role in the
leak," noting the California Democrat "previously had been warned to be >careful because he had a reputation for leaking classified information."
An outspoken Trump critic, Swalwell has denied being the source of leaks.

Shane Harris, who later jumped to the Washington Post before recently >landing at The Atlantic, did not respond to requests for comment.

FBI investigators wrote that the committee whistleblower "advised it is >likely the leaks are being conducted through cutouts." They added, "He >believed some individuals may be using their spouse's phones to contact

World Net Daily EXCLUSIVE!!!

Senate Russia report proves Trump collusion was very real. But do voters
care?
Trump and Biden's contrasting positions on Russian interference in American elections are clear. Whether voters care about these differences, however,
is not as obvious.
Image: President Trump hosts workforce advisory board meeting at the White House in Washington
President Donald Trump listens during a meeting of the American Workforce Policy Advisory Board in the East Room at the White House on June 26, 2020.Carlos Barria / Reuters file
Aug. 22, 2020, 4:30 AM EDT
By Michael McFaul

The Senate Intelligence Committee should be applauded for releasing the
fifth and final volume of its investigation into Russian interference in
the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

With over 200 witness interviews and roughly 1 million documents reviewed,
the nearly 1,000-page report documents in detail the comprehensive campaign conducted by Russian President Vladimir Putin and his proxies to seek influence within President Donald Trump's campaign, help Trump win the 2016 presidential election and amplify polarization and division within American society.

Far from a hoax, as the president so often claimed, the report reveals how
the Trump campaign willingly engaged with Russian operatives implementing
the influence effort.

Far from a hoax, as the president so often claimed, the report reveals how
the Trump campaign willingly engaged with Russian operatives implementing
the influence effort. For instance, the report exposes interactions and information exchanged between Russian intelligence officer Konstantin
Kilimnik and then-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. According to the report, campaign figures opresented attractive targets for foreign
influence, creating notable counterintelligence vulnerabilities.o (Manafort was later convicted of tax and bank fraud.)
Want more articles like this? Follow THINK on Instagram to get updates on
the week's most important political analysis

Concluding one of the highest-profile congressional investigations in
recent memory, the report also uncovers abuses within the U.S. governmentAs investigation of this operation. These methods require review and reform.

The bipartisan tone of the majority of the report, released by a committee chaired by Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, should be welcomed by all Americans who want our elected leaders to protect American sovereignty. National security should never be a partisan issue.

Defiant Trump seeks Putin meeting after report finds he lied to Mueller
about Russia
03:49

Tragically, however, some of the most egregious practices from the 2016 presidential campaign documented by the Senate investigation are repeating themselves in the 2020 presidential campaign. Once again, Putin wants Trump
to win and appears to be seeking to undermine the legitimacy of our
election. Just like in 2016, Putin has deployed his conventional media, his social media operations and his intelligence assets to pursue these objectives.

Most shockingly, Trump and his allies have decided to u again u play right along. Because waiting for criminal investigations or more congressional hearings will be too late, it will be up to American voters to decide when
and how cooperation with foreign actors during a presidential election
crosses the line. Trump's activities to date are not appropriate.

On Aug. 7, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence warned about foreign interference in the 2020 election: oWe assess that Russia is using
a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President Biden and what it sees as an anti-Russia aestablishment.Ao The ODNI report noted that pro-Russia Ukrainian parliamentarian Andriy Derkach is spreading false
claims about Joe Biden as part of this effort. oSome Kremlin-linked actors
are also seeking to boost President TrumpAs candidacy on social media and Russian television,o it observed.
Related
Opinion
Senate Republicans are running interference for the postmaster general u
and Trump

Instead of criticizing this behavior, however, Trump and his allies are amplifying and promoting Russian disinformation online. Perhaps most amazingly, Trump is circulating to his 85 million Twitter followers
material provided by foreign actors designed to discredit Biden. Derkach u
the pro-Russia Ukrainian oligarch u is reportedly providing these
slanderous materials to Republicans, including Sen. Ron Johnson of
Wisconsin and Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa.

Johnson and Grassley have also defended the use of material from former Ukrainian diplomat Andriy Telizhenko, who is working with Rudy Giuliani to spread a discrediting anti-Biden narrative. In fact, Johnson commented directly in an interview about his new investigation of U.S. intelligence activities during the Obama era: oI would think it would certainly help
Donald Trump win re-election and certainly be pretty good a evidence about
not voting for Vice President Biden.o

Following public pressure and increasing tensions, the senators released a public statement denying participating in the Russian disinformation
campaign. Yet, it all feels like a replay of Natalia VeselnitskayaAs
mission to Trump headquarters in the summer of 2016 to provide odirto on then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton u only now, all in the open.

Trump camp cooperation with Russia explicated in new Senate intel report
03:11

Amid a patchwork of responses from the U.S. government and social media companies, many analysts and nongovernmental organizations have become more skillful in tracking and aggressively countering disinformation operations. But exposure alone does not deter adversaries, nor does it stop the
evolution of their tactics.

Furthermore, divisions on race, religion and immigration in the United
States have only deepened in the past year. With China, Iran and Venezuela
now in the disinformation game, our current presidential election is, in
some ways, already more chaotic than 2016.

After revelations about Russian interference in 2016, including the
targeting of elections systems in all 50 states, American leaders concerned with defending our sovereignty and protecting our national security should have established a bipartisan commission u as they did after Sept. 11, 2001
u to investigate all dimensions of external influence, including the Obama administrationAs response. Trump opposed such a commission.

Subsequently, Robert MuellerAs team at the Department of Justice was given
the narrower assignment of investigating criminal activity, which they discovered along with at least 140 contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian nationals. Both Russians and Americans were indicted, some of whom
are in jail today. But MuellerAs focus on criminal activity ignored counterintelligence threats that developed during 2016.

This final volume from the Senate Intelligence Committee has documented in greater detail the counterintelligence threats at stake. Now, the American voters must decide what is fair and honorable in political competition u
and what is not.

It is wrong to solicit, let alone use, help from a foreign government to
win an election. It is especially wrong to seek such assistance from an adversary like Russia and to do so in a presidential election. We donAt
need PutinAs help in choosing our president. We, the American voters, can
do that on our own.

TrumpAs campaign encouraged PutinAs help in 2016 and celebrated that assistance when it arrived, especially materials that were stolen by
Russian intelligence officers and published by WikiLeaks. Putin violated American sovereignty: stealing private property and then using it to help Trump and hurt Clinton.

When asked about these facts at a July 2018 press conference in Helsinki
while standing next to Putin, Trump denied the findings of his u of our u
own intelligence community and instead defended the Russian autocrat.

Trump has since remained loyal to Putin, not once criticizing him in public and often undermining policies from his own administration to contain and deter PutinAs belligerent behavior abroad. Trump has refused to pledge that
he will not accept foreign help this fall. When asked last year about accepting dirt from a foreign government on his electoral opponents, Trump bluntly stated: oI think I'd take it."


In contrast, Biden has affirmed that his campaign will not use information
or accept assistance provided by foreign actors, an act that our Stanford research team urged all presidential candidates take in our 2019 report on
the integrity of U.S. elections. In addition, Biden has assured Americans
that he would retaliate in response to any foreign interference.

Trump and BidenAs contrasting positions on Russian interference in American elections are clear. Whether voters care about these differences, however,
is not as obvious. On Election Day, we will find out.

Related:

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2