Testimony: FBI offered Christopher Steele $1 million if he could “prove elements” of his bogus dossier


The following contains embedded content which is editorial in nature and expresses the opinion of the writer. 

ALEXANDRIA, VA- If only there were a true media in the country…the following would be a bombshell and forever relegate the Obama administration to one of the most corrupt in American history. Sadly, most Americans will know nothing about it.

What is the bombshell? According to the Washington Examiner, Barack Obama’s FBI offered disgraced former British spy Christopher Steele an “incentive” of up to $1 million if he could prove elements in the so-called “Steele dossier.”

Sadly for the Obama administration, Steele was unable to back up his claims, according to bombshell testimony in the trial of Igor Danchenko, charged with repeatedly lying to the FBI over sourcing for information provided as a basis for Steele’s dossier. Danchenko has pleaded not guilty to those charges.

In court testimony, FBI supervisory intelligence analyst Brian Auten, who interviewed Danchenko in 2017 as part of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team interviewed Steele in early October 2016 in Rome as the FBI was investigating to obtain additional details on the dossier.

Auten revealed the potential $1 million payday for Steele while testifying as part of Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the FBI scheme to lay false allegations on former President Donald Trump when he was a candidate in 2016.

The dossier served as a key piece in the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign for allegedly engaging in a conspiracy with Russia to facilitate election interference in the 2016 presidential election.

It also served as a primary source for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant applications submitted by the FBI and directed at former Trump campaign aide Carter Page, the Daily Caller wrote.

During testimony on Tuesday, Durham himself questioned Auten, the special counsel team’s first witness in the trial, which began with jury selection and opening statements in a federal courtroom in Alexandria, Virginia Tuesday.

Durham pressed Auten under questioning, asking if the FBI had offered any incentives to Steele in exchange for information corroborating the dossier’s allegations. Danchenko’s attorneys objected to Durham’s line of questioning, however, were overruled by the presiding judge.

“Yes, it did,” Auten said. “Mr. Steele was offered anywhere up to a million dollars” for information “which could help prove the allegations.”

When pressed further, Auten answered, “No,” when asked if Steele was ever able to provide credible evidence backing up his claims outlined in the dossier. Auten also testified that Danchenko never provided corroboration for the dossier’s allegations as well.

Moreover, Auten testified that other U.S. intelligence agencies had examined the claims outlined in Steele’s dossier and none were able to confirm specific claims outlined in the dossier.

The Examiner further reported that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz noted that “both” FBI counterintelligence head Bill Priestap and disgraced former FBI special agent Peter Strzok claimed an FBI agent who accompanied Auten to Rome had “provided more information than was necessary to Steele.” Moreover, Horowitz said his team “determined” that the case agent “did not have prior authorization to make the [classified] disclosure.”

The entire Russia collusion scheme is closely intertwined with the Clinton campaign, with then-Clinton campaign slip-and-fall attorney Marc Elias hiring Fusion GPS and holding a meeting with Steele in 2016. Fusion GPS hired Steele to conduct an anti-Trump hit campaign which turned into the Russia collusion scheme.

According to the founders of Fusion GPS, an October 2016 meeting allegedly “yielded an important bit of intelligence for Fusion” about Crossfire Hurricane. According to Clinton 2016 campaign manager Robby Mook, Elias passed along to the Clinton campaign Trump-Russia details he gleaned from Fusion GPS.

Auten had forwarded a February 2017 intelligence memo to top FBI officials about the interview with Danchenko, however Horowitz said it “did not describe the inconsistencies” from the FBI interview which took place in January 2017. That memo was sent to then-FBI Director James Comey and since-fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe in March 2017. Comey was eventually fired by then-President Trump.

In March 2017, the FBI took Danchenko aboard as a confidential human source, working in said capacity through October 2020, Durham’s team has said in court filings.

The Examiner further reported that Auten had also been involved in the FBI’s efforts to obtain flawed surveillance against Trump’s 2016 campaign associate Carter Page.

In his December 2019 report, Horowitz debunked the Steele dossier’s Russia collusion claims involving the Trump campaign, while simultaneously criticizing the DOJ and FBI for committing at least 17 “significant errors and omissions” related to the FISA warrants against Carter Page, as well as for the bureau’s reliance on the bogus Steele dossier. Horowitz has said that FBI interviews with Danchenko “raised significant questions about the reliability of the Steele election reporting.”

In questioning Auten, Durham entered an October 2020 LinkedIn message from Danchenko into evidence, whereby he bragged to Anastasia Gnezditskaia, claiming, “I collected 80% of the raw intel and half of the analysis for the Chris Steele dossier and went through debriefings with the FBI on collusion matters.”

Following the release of Horowitz’s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse report, FBI Director Christopher Wray referred Auten to the Office of Professional Responsibility for potential disciplinary action, however that proceeding was, according to Wray, slowed down to cooperate with Durham’s criminal probe. Not so ironically, that disciplinary referral came just after Auten’s assessment led to Hunter Biden the next year.

Durham alleges Danchenko anonymously tied a fabricated claim about Trump 2016 campaign manager Paul Manafort to a man named Charles Dolan, an ally of Clinton who had spent years, including in 2016, working for Russian businesses and the Russian government.

The indictment further alleges Danchenko lied to the FBI about a phone call he claims he received from Belarus-born Sergei Millian, who since became a US citizen and businessman. That phone call, according to Danchenko, is where he allegedly learned about a “conspiracy of cooperation” between Trump and the Russians, which Durham says is false.

Separately, Auten in 2020 “opened an assessment which was used by an FBI headquarters team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease,” whistleblower allegations made public by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who noted that one of the allegations shows “verified and verifiable derogatory information on Hunter Biden was falsely labeled as disinformation.”


For more on the Russia collusion hoax, we invite you to:


This article contains editorial content by a staff writer for Law Enforcement Today


WASHINGTON, DC – The mother of all “October surprises,” predicated on a well-placed lie — was supposed to derail Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The lie, that the Trump Organization had secret computer server connections to Russia-based Alfa-Bank, was immediately discerned by the FBI to be implausible.

Despite that knowledge, the Donald Trump-Russia collusion hoax was relentlessly advanced by Democrats during the election.

Who told the lie, to whom it was told, and under what circumstances, forms the basis of special counsel John Durham’s trial against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann. Durham’s three-year investigation culminated in the trial that opened Monday with jury selection and continued Tuesday with opening statements from the prosecution and defense teams.

Sussmann is charged under 18 U.S.C. 1001 with lying to the FBI during a September 2016 meeting with then-FBI General Counsel James Baker, at which Sussmann claimed he had evidence of a back-channel connection between Trump and Alfa, a major Russian bank closely allied with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Sussmann pleaded not guilty to the single charge.

Durham alleges that cybersecurity lawyer Sussmann told Baker he wasn’t working on behalf of any client when he, in fact, was representing the Clinton campaign and “Tech Executive-1,” known to be former Neustar executive Rodney Joffe.

Durham alleged Sussmann also conveyed the same false information to the CIA in February 2017.

According to the Sussmann indictment, Joffe directed data scientists at Georgia Tech to look for links between Trump and Russia. The indictment also quoted emails in which Joffe claimed to have been offered a top cybersecurity position in the Clinton administration if she won.

An FBI agent involved in analyzing the Trump-Russia collusion story testified Tuesday that the claims were rejected within days of analysis.

Scott Hellman, an FBI supervisory special agent who investigates cybercrime, said he and a supervisor retrieved the thumb drives and other information passed to the FBI, reviewed the secret communication claims and quickly rejected them.


Special counsel Robert Mueller, the FBI, the CIA, a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation and John Durham’s team all have doubted or rejected the Alfa-Bank claims pushed by Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

The CIA concluded that Sussmann’s allegations about the “secret channel” as well as a separate allegation about Russian-manufactured cellphones was not “technically plausible,” did not “withstand technical scrutiny,” “contained gaps,” “conflicted with (itself),” and was “user-created and not machine/tool generated,” according to Durham’s filing.

The two Alfa-Bank servers in question sent more than 2,700 “look-up” messages in 2016 to a Trump Organization-connected server operated by Spectrum Health, a managed-healthcare organization in Michigan.

According to a white paper that Sussmann included with his spiel to the FBI, Spectrum Health’s IP address is a TOR exit node “used exclusively by Alfa Bank.” [The Onion Router, or TOR, is open-source software that enables anonymous  communication.]

However, those 2,700 “look-ups” using a mail1.trump-email.com host were actually created by Cendyn, a firm that performs marketing and promotions for hotels, including Trump hotels, through Listrak, a Philadelphia-based spam email contractor. The communication was nothing more than spam traffic and there was no “secret server” between the Trump Organization and Russia.

Although The New York Times, The Washington Post and other major media outlets investigated the claims, presumably coming up with the same results, none published an article about them until Slate did so Oct. 31, 2016. Days before the election and possibly after some damage was done.

Agent Hellman testified that he and then-supervisor Nate Batty rejected the allegations after roughly a day. The FBI agent testified:

“We did not agree with the conclusion … that this represented a secret communication channel. Whoever had written that paper had jumped to some conclusions that were not supported by the data.”

Agent Hellman added:

“The methodology they chose was questionable to me.”



Despite this revelation — that a lawyer for the Clinton campaign lied to the FBI in order to frame Donald Trump and that the FBI knew immediately that it was a lie — the Big Three evening news broadcasts on Tuesday ignored the story.

Instead, ABC’s World News TonightCBS Evening News and NBC Nightly News wasted airtime on weather reports, a brush fire in Los Angeles and the Johnny Depp/Amber Heard defamation trial. Are

Americans really more interested in the salacious antics of a Hollywood couple? The heavily left-leaning news organizations would like their viewers to think so.

Fox News Channel has a different perspective, apparently, and covered the day’s revelations in its Special Report. 

Correspondent David Spunt, reporting live outside the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C., revealed that:

“Federal prosecutors say that former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann manipulated the FBI to open this investigation into then-candidate Donald Trump to create that October surprise right before the election.”

Prosecutors, in court documents and pretrial hearings, have characterized Sussmann’s actions as part of a smear campaign to use political opposition research to prompt an FBI investigation and to use the resulting press coverage against Trump and his campaign.


Spunt reported that prosecutors said Sussmann:

 “. . .went to the FBI and said he had some information linking the Trump Organization via a computer server to a Russian-based Alfa-Bank then owned by associates close to Vladimir Putin.” 

Spunt went on to report:

“An FBI agent on the stand today said it didn’t take long to determine there was no secret back channel between the Trump Organization and Russia.”

He explained the defense’s response:

“Sussmann’s team told jurors the complete opposite, arguing that Sussmann, a well-respected cyber-attorney with a top-secret clearance, never tried to hide anything from the FBI.”

Spunt said the defense sought to excuse their client’s lies to the FBI by claiming that the agency was “well aware” for whom Sussmann worked.  

The leftist broadcast networks seem to long for the days before the Trump/Russia collusion fairytale was debunked as the boldfaced lie that it was. It remains to be seen how they will present a possible conviction in the courtroom of an Obama-appointed judge seated with a hostile-to-Trump jury.


Deep swamp: Judge in Sussmann case married to attorney of FBI agent involved in Russia collusion case

May 17, 2022

The following includes editorial content which is the opinion of the author, a staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.

WASHINGTON, DC – The Washington, D.C. swamp is deep. The latest swamp rat to emerge is the trial judge in the case of former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann.

According to ZeroHedge, U.S. District Judge Christopher “Casey” Cooper, appointed to the federal bench by Barack Obama, has ties to disgraced former FBI agent Lisa Page.

Cooper is married to attorney Amy Jeffress, who is representing Page, a key figure in the FBI’s Russia collusion scheme, in her lawsuit against the FBI. Jeffress previously served as a top aide to none other than former Attorney General Eric Holder.

Moreover, current feckless Attorney General Merrick Garland presided over the 1999 wedding of Cooper and Jeffress. As we said, the swamp runs deep.

In a Zoom call last week, Cooper advised the parties in the case that he was acquainted with Sussman from back in the 1990s when they both worked at the DOJ. As quoted by the Washington Examiner, Cooper said:

“I worked in the ‘90s at the deputy attorney general’s office two years following law school. Mr. Sussmann also worked at the building at the same time in the criminal division. We did not work together or socialize, but I think it’s fair to say we were professional acquaintances.

“I don’t believe that this creates a conflict, but my regular practice is to disclose these sorts of relationships with lawyers or with parties on the record. And I would advise you that I would be happy to entertain a motion if either side believes there is a conflict on that basis or any other.”

Page is a former FBI lawyer who was knee-deep in the Russia collusion hoax and played a key role in the investigation into former President Donald Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia to sway the 2016 presidential election.

That hoax was concocted by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee and was pushed in the media by a number of government operatives, including Sussmann. At the same time, the FBI was involved in an alleged “media leak strategy.”

Page was famously engaged in an extra-marital affair with FBI agent Peter Strzok. Steamy text messages between the two showed how invested they and the FBI were in seeing Clinton and not Trump elected.

Strzok was one of the FBI agents involved in the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s unsecured server, a case that went nowhere when then-FBI Director James Comey declared that no crime had occurred.

The ties between Cooper and Sussmann, as disconnected as they may appear to be, paints a disturbing picture, and once again puts a focus on how deep the ties in the DC swamp are. Moreover, the ties between Cooper and individuals who were so invested in taking down Donald Trump that they risked their cushy government careers and pensions is equally disturbing.

Do you need more ties in the tangled web? Cooper served as the presiding judge in the Benghazi ringleader case, where the ties between his wife and the DOJ also posed a conflict of interest. Consider this:

After graduating from Stanford Law School in 1993, Cooper clerked for Chief Judge Abner J. Mikva on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit from 1994 to 1996. He then went to work as a special assistant to Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick in the Clinton Justice Department. In 2001, he went into private practice for 17 years, working at the firms of Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin; then Baker Botts, and finally at Covington & Burling, where Holder was a partner before becoming Obama’s first attorney general.


In private practice, Cooper and his father-in-law William Jeffress successfully defended senior-level Saudi Arabian government officials in U.S. court against a lawsuit brought by the families of 9/11 victims.

The case against Sussmann centers around his part in furthering the Russia collusion hoax and lying to the FBI. Special Counsel John Durham alleges that two months before the 2016 election, Sussmann told FBI General Counsel James Baker that he was not doing work “for any client.”

He then requested and attended a meeting in which he showed “purported data and ‘white papers’ that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel’” between the Trump organization and Alfa Bank, a Kremlin tied financial institution, Fox News reported.

According to Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, the family ties between Cooper and the Page civil case demands he recuse himself. Fitton told Fox News:

“If a spouse has a substantial interest in the outcome of a proceeding, then a judge should consider recusal. That is a question Judge Cooper will have to ask himself.”

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Submit a Correction
Related Posts