FBI SIA Brian Auten is once again in the news in connection with the (absurd) 2020 FBI intel assessment that Hunter laptop was "Russian disinformation". grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…
Auten has long been a person of interest to this corner of Twitter twitter.com/search?q=auten…
In the December 2019, the "Supervisory Intel Analyst" (SIA) - previously an unknown personnage - played a leading role. The Horowitz text decribed multiple mis-steps and mistakes involving the SIA, but they were mostly not listed in the whitewashing Summary.
FN, walkafyre, Hans and I began collaborating (by Twitter DM group) right after Horowitz. Identity of SIA was an early interest. In Feb 2020, I reported
SIA present at Crossfire birth, worked for Moffa and surmised that "Brian" in Moffa transcript was SIA
As a policy point, I observed at the time that it was ludicrous that federal civil service agreement only permitted identification of the very most senior officials. Though intimately involved in highly influential assessments, Auten's identity was concealed even from Congress.
I looked through the JARS2 list of FBI agents (A-H) and found two "Brian" SIAs with Washington phone numbers: Auten and Cohen. I located some background information on Auten - first mention of him re Russiagate that I'm aware of. But still only a short list, not identification
identification of Auten as the SIA came from an unexpected source on May 7, 2020. In Exhibit 9 to a Flynn motion, courtlistener.com/docket/6234142… ever-alert Walkafyre noticed Auten's name in a less redacted version of a Crossfire email. We were then sure that Auten was the SIA.
at the time, we were focussed on identification of Steele's Primary Sub-Source. By then, we had figured out that the FBI had lied repeatedly both to Congress and courts that the PSS was "Russian-based", when he actually lived near DC, prob northern VA.
on July 17, 2020, the heavily redacted Danchenko EC was published. We could tell right away that Auten was one of interviewers and, as it turned out, author of the EC. SA Somma, the other interviewer, left Crossfire, returning to NYFO almost immediately after interview.
as is well known to readers of this corner of Twitter, on July 19, @Hmmm57474203 cleverly identified Igor Danchenko as the PSS and within a week or two, Fool_Nelson (mainly) and others had identified all his supposed sub-sources - Fool's Rosetta Stone is a great story.
but sticking to Auten: we now knew that Auten was in Crossfire from the start, at Oct 4, 2016 Steele interview, at (and wrote up) Danchenko Jan 2017 interviews. Later we would learn that he was a contributor to Mueller investigation and at (and wrote up) Sep 2017 Steele interview
next day (Jul 20/20), as we identified Steele's PSS as former Brookings employee and Fiona Hill protege Igor Danchenko and beginning to unravel FBI role in perpetuating fraud, Dems (esp SSCI) began smearing Johnson and Grassley for "Russian disinformation" ronjohnson.senate.gov/2020/8/johnson…
as we parsed the Danchenko EC beneath the redactions, it became very clear that Danchenko had confessed to the FBI that he had never met Millian and that the Steele dossier sourcing had been fabricated for the allegations most critical to ICA and FISA (esp Report 95)
Danchenko told Auten and Somma that he had sent two emails to Millian - the supposed source of the blockbuster collusion allegations in Report 95 - but did not receive a response to either one.
it's hard to imagine a more obvious follow up than examining these two emails.
we can speak with some authority on this, since we did exactly that within hours of first reading EC. On Jul 18, we contacted Millian and asked him to look for two summer emails from a 4+9; on Jul 19, following Hmmm's id of Danchenko, we asked him to look for two Danchenko emails
within minutes, Millian had located the two emails in which Danchenko sought a meeting under false pretences. Second email was in mid-August - after 4 Steele reports attributed to Millian. The emails proved what Millian had said all along: he had been framed as a Steele source
readers need to recall that only a few Steele dossier reports "mattered" for continued predicate of Crossfire Hurricane, for the ICA or for Carter Page FISA (which I view as absurdly oversold as an issue, but Horowitz' observations on its probable cause also apply to Crossfire)
Horowitz observed it was Steele Report 95 that was "relied upon" for Page FISA probable cause. (It was also relied upon for continued predication of Crossfire and ICA.) But, as of Jan 24, 2017, Danchenko confessed that he had never met Millian. The attribution of 95 was in ruins.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREAD: what is one to make of an intel community (and media) which (1) endorsed Steele dossier as legitimate information and (2) rejected Hunter laptop as "Russian disinformation"? Both assessments were grotesquely wrong. How did IC get it so wrong? And where's the post-audit?
To the extent that Durham investigation is supposed to have been a post-audit of the Russiagate hoax, it is evident that it has gone seriously off the rails, as, after many years, its sole output is two trivial prosecutions of minor incidents by non-IC persons.
the suspicions fomented by massive and corrosive Russiagate hoax did not originate from Sussmann lying about whether he had a client or Danchenko lying about an anonymous call. (And will FBI even be able to show that Danchenko didn't get an anonymous call?)
determination of Biden regime to expunge Trump admin and to make sure that Trump does not come back is exactly convergent with policies in 2013 of the neo-Nazi Ukrainian faction backed by US and EU to expunge Yanukovych and "make sure that toppled regime does not make a comeback"
the above quote is from a March 31, 2013 publication of an interview with Oleg Tyahnybok, then leader of Ukrainian neo-Nazi Svoboda party (formerly the Socialist Nationalist Party of Ukraine). web.archive.org/web/2013122411…
this interview was about eight months before Maidan insurrection which, whatever its origins may have been, was almost immediately infiltrated by armed neo-Nazis (backed by US and EU) who provided the violence that overthrew democratically elected president Yanukovych.
Twitter suspended my access until I deleted tweet in which I contrasted US support for violent Maidan insurrection in Ukraine with milquetoast Jan 6 protest that US hyperventilates about, on grounds that Ukraine images contained "gratuitous gore". I appealed. Nothing happened
Twitter didnt reply to appeal doesn't seem to have timetable to hear appeals (which they limit to 160 characters). However, they offer restoration of access if one presses a button that deletes tweet under acknowledgement that tweet had "violated the Twitter Rules".
After a week without any response from Twitter and with no timetable for ever getting a response, I caved in.
third installment of threads on Maidan insurrection in Ukraine and contrast between US demand that Ukraine govt stand down when confronted with actual insurrection, including sanctions on govt, and US reaction to Jan 6
1/
we left off previous thread on first day of Maidan (Nov 21, 2013), which began when Yanukovych announced stalled negotiations with EU over accession terms. EU was playing hardball with Ukraine on 1) how to finance lost Russian trade; 2) Tymoshenko corruption conviction.
a EU summit was scheduled on Nov 28, 2013. Yanukovych went to summit hoping to persuade EU leaders that there needed to be some recognition and accommodation both for Ukraine's financial problems and their existing trade with Russia (esp from east) for which EU deal wasnt panacea
. This thread will begin on first day and walk through events.
Maidan insurrection began as a somewhat peaceful protest on November 21, 2013, credited to a Facebook post by Mustafa Nayem calling for demonstration on Maidan square in Kyiv. Nayem memoir kyivpost.com/article/opinio…
Video of events
on Nov 21, protest was rather small, but some big names turned out: Klitschko is easy to recognize. The fellow in glasses has important role later in Ukrainegate. I don't recognize guy with bullhorn - would welcome ID.
Continuing analysis of Mar 8 FBI-DOJ Talking Points (Sussmann Exhibit DX-563), its summary of Crossfire status included section on Crossfire target Flynn. Which shows why FBI originally didn't think Flynn was lying about sanctions.