Story Analyzer Dashboard

  Horowitz Report Chapter 8 Section II

      Parts C, D, E, F, and G
C. Information Concerning Steele 's Past Work-Related Performance

As described in Chapter Five, NSD told us that in the absence of information corroborating the facts from Steele 's reporting asserted in the Carter Page FISA application, it was particularly important for the application to articulate to the court the FBl 's assessment of the reliability of the source.
Therefore, all four FISA applications articulated for the court the basis for the FBI 's assessment that Steele was reliable. In all four applications, the FBI 's source characterization statement began with the identification of Steele as a former[ REDACTED]. FBI and NSD officials told us Steele 's reliability, the FBI placed great weight on Steele 's[ REDACTED]. Additionally, as described in Chapter Five, the FISC legal advisor asked NSD to explicitly identify[ REDACTED] in the source characterization statement.

As described in Chapter Six, after the first FISA application was filed, but before Renewal Application No. 1, Priestap and Strzok obtained information about Steele from persons with direct knowledge of his performance of his work duties in a prior position in an effort to further assess Steele 's reliability.
This was the first time anyone associated with the Crossfire Hurricane investigation discussed Steele with these persons, and it was prompted, at least in part, by Steele 's disclosures to Mother Jones in late October 2016. Priestap and Strzok took handwritten notes of the feedback they received from the former employer about Steele. These notes referenced that Steele had held a" moderately senior'' position in Moscow, as the Crossfire Hurricane team had originally thought and advised OI. Nothing in the notes indicated that Steele was" high-ranking'' as stated in the applications. The notes described positive feedback about Steele, such as" smart,''" person of integrity,''" no reason to doubt integrity,'' and''[ i] f he reported it, he believed it.'' Priestap told us that his impression was that Steele was considered to be a" Russia expert'' and very competent in his work. However, Priestap and Strzok were also provided negative feedback concerning Steele 's judgment, including''[ d] emonstrates lack of self-awareness,[ demonstrates] poor judgment;''''[ k] een to help but underpinned by poor judgment;''''[ j] udgment: pursuing people[ with] political risk but no intel value;''''[ r] eporting in good faith, but not clear what he would have done to validate;'' and''[ d] id n't always exercise great judgment-- sometimes[ he] believes he knows best.''

Priestap and Strzok told us that they did not change their overall assessment of Steele 's reliability after being provided this information because they were told that Steele was never untruthful.
According to Priestap, he interpreted the negative feedback about Steele 's judgment to mean that Steele was a person who strongly believed in his convictions and that those convictions did not always align with management 's convictions. Priestap said he himself confronted similar disagreements over prioritization with his own staff, and what stood out more to Priestap were the statements indicating that Steele had never been intentionally dishonest in his prior work. Priestap also told us that, according to the feedback he received, Steele 's past reporting accurately reflected what he was told, but Priestap said the question was the accuracy of what he was told, which could not addressed in this instance without knowing the identity of Steele 's sources for the election reporting. Strzok interpreted the feedback regarding Steele 's judgment to mean that Steele sometimes followed the" shiny object'' without a judgment about whether the shiny thing was really worth pursuing given the risks involved, which was seen as a hindrance to his career progression, but that Steele had no history of fabricating, embellishing, or otherwise" spinning'' information.

FBI officials told us, and documents reflect, that Strzok briefed the Crossfire Hurricane team regarding the information he received about Steele.
Case Agent 1 's handwritten notes from a December 2016 team meeting reflect that the team was told that Steele" may have some judgment problems'' but that the team could" continue to rely on reports for FISA.'' Case Agent 1 did not recall this discussion or who said that they could continue to rely on Steele 's reporting in the next FISA application.

Handwritten notes from the OI Unit Chief reflect that the OGC Attorney advised the OI Unit Chief and the OI Attorney at the end of November 2016 that the team had met with persons with direct knowledge of Steele 's performance of his work duties in a prior position.
According to the notes, the OGC Attorney told OI that Steele 's past contacts said he" could be prone to rash judgments.'' The notes also indicate that the OGC Attorney advised OI that the FBI did an internal review and found no indication that any of Steele 's reporting was false or misleading and that McCabe had signed off on requesting a FISA renewal targeting Carter Page.

The OI Attorney told us that he only vaguely recalled this discussion, but the OI Unit Chief said that he recalled being told that Steele was prone to rash judgment in his actions but not in his reporting.
The OI Unit Chief told us he also recalled that the FBI believed it had no reason to question Steele 's reporting and therefore had not changed its assessment of his reliability. Evans recalled that one or both of them later advised him, probably in December 2016, that the FBI had been told Steele had" questionable judgment'' but was otherwise professional and reliable.

As for why Renewal Application No. 1( and the subsequent renewal applications) did not include this information about Steele, Evans and the OI Unit Chief told us that, because the information did not change the FBI 's assessment as to Steele 's reliability, the circumstances leading to the FBI 's closure of Steele as a CHS was the more critical update for the court.
However, during their OIG interviews, Evans and the OI Unit Chief were shown Strzok 's notes. After reviewing the notes, both Evans and the OI Unit Chief said that the notes contained more detail than what they recalled being told by the FBI, including the statement that it was" not clear what[ Steele] would have done to validate'' his reporting. Both said that they would have asked for more detail about that particular comment if they had known at the time. According to Evans, he would have considered whether to include information in the renewal application if he had known.

D. Information Regarding Steele Reporting 's Ties to the Democratic Party, the Democratic National Committee, and the Hillary Clinton Campaign

As described in Chapter Five, the first Carter Page FISA application contained a footnote advising the court that Steele 's election reporting may have originated from a request for political opposition research:

[ Steele], who now owns a foreign/business/financial intelligence firm, was approached by an identified U.S. person, who indicated to[ Steele] that a U.S.-based law firm had hired the identified U.S. person to conduct research regarding Candidate# 1 's ties to Russia( the identified U.S. person and[ Steele] have a long-standing business relationship).
The identified U.S. person hired[ Steele] to conduct this research. The identified U.S. person never advised[ Steele] as to the motivation behind the research into Candidate# 1 's ties to Russia. The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate# 1 's campaign.( Emphasis added).

According to FBI officials, and as represented to OI at the time of the first application, the Crossfire Hurricane team was told by Steele that he had been hired by Fusion GPS 's Glenn Simpson to perform his election-related work, was advised by Steele that Fusion GPS had been retained by an unnamed law firm, and had not been informed by Steele of the motivation of Fusion GPS.
Additionally, as we discuss in Chapter Four, the FBI assumed, but did not know at the time of the first application, that Steele was conducting opposition research. As described in Chapter Five, McCabe told us that he thought he had heard by the time of the first application that Simpson had been working first for a Republican and then later for a Democrat. However, McCabe also told the OIG that his memory on the timing of events is not always reliable. Other FBI officials told us that the team did not know who hired Simpson until after the first FISA application. We were told by Evans that the use of the term" speculates'' in the footnote was intended to convey that even though the FBI did not know at the time the identity of Simpson 's and the U.S. law firm 's ultimate client, the FBI believed it was likely that it was someone who was seeking political opposition research against candidate Trump.

According to FBI officials, the Crossfire Hurricane team did not investigate who ultimately paid for Steele 's reporting.
The OGC Unit Chief and the Supervisory Intel Analyst told us that the team focused instead on vetting the accuracy of the information in Steele 's reporting because, if the reporting turned out to be true, it would not matter to the team who ultimately paid for the research.

Nevertheless, in the months following the first FISA application, information became known to the Crossfire Hurricane team that provided greater clarity about the political origins and connections of Steele 's reporting.
As described in Chapter Nine, by no later than November 21, 2016, Ohr had advised FBI officials that Steele 's reporting had been given to the Hillary Clinton campaign( among other entities) and that Steele was" desperate'' that Trump not be elected. SSA 1 and the Supervisory Intel Analyst told us, and email communications reflect, that by no later than January 11, 2017, SSA 1 and the Supervisory Intel Analyst understood that Fusion GPS had been hired by the DNC and another unidentified entity to research candidate Trump 's ties to Russia. Finally, handwritten notes and other documentation reflect that in February and March 2017 it was broadly known among FBI officials working on and supervising the investigation, and shared with senior NSD and ODAG officials, that Simpson( who hired Steele) was himself hired first by a candidate during the Republican primaries and then later by someone related to the Democratic Party. Nevertheless, the footnote in Renewal Application Nos. 1, 2 and 3, was not revised to reflect this additional information.

Case Agent 6 told us that after he took over the Carter Page investigation, he believed he had a conversation with Case Agent 1 about the identity of Steele 's client, but he did not recall any details about what he was told.
Case Agent 1 and the OGC Attorney told us that they did not recall when they learned who ultimately paid for the research, and Case Agent 1 said that it may have been sometime after he left the case. The OI Attorney told us that he did not recall being advised that the FBI had more clarity on who had paid for Steele 's research.

By March 2017, Evans had received information indicating that Simpson was first hired by a Republican primary candidate and then later by someone related to the Democratic Party.
Evans told us that he did not recall revisiting the language in the footnote after learning this information. He said that he interpreted the word" speculates'' in the footnote to have the same meaning as the FBI" assesses'' or" believes.'' Further, in his opinion, the footnote clearly advised the court of the potential for political bias, such that he could not see how the additional information would have made a real difference for the court. He said that he did not know that members of the Crossfire Hurricane team had learned that Fusion GPS was hired specifically by the DNC and that, if that were true, he would have wanted to update the court about that information, not because it was material, but just in the interest of candor with the court.

The OGC Unit Chief recalled the team briefing Comey that the research was conducted first for a Republican primary candidate and then later for the Democratic Party.
We determined this briefing likely occurred in March 2017. Comey told us that he remembered being advised of this information. He also told us that he did not recall taking notice of the word" speculates'' at the time he reviewed the FISA applications, but that in reviewing the language again he thought it" fairly conveyed'' that the research originated from a biased source.

Yates told us that she remembered hearing that Steele 's research was conducted first for a Republican and then later for a Democrat, but she said she did not recall whether she heard that before or after she left the Department in late January 2017.
Yates was removed as Acting Attorney General on January 30, 2017, and we did not find evidence that she was informed of this information prior to that time. We identified notes indicating that by February and March 2017 it was broadly known that Simpson was hired first by a Republican primary candidate and then later by someone related to the Democratic Party. Boente told us that he remembered knowing before he approved Renewal Application No. 2 in April 2017 that Simpson had been hired by a Republican primary candidate and then a Democratic candidate, but Boente said he did not recall any discussion about whether to revise the language in the footnote. He said that whether, in hindsight, the FBI should have revised the language was not a question he could answer during his OIG interview without first having the benefit of an analysis. Rosenstein told us that he did not recall the FBI telling him about the political origins of Steele 's reporting before he approved Renewal Application No. 3 in June 2017 or whether he just inferred that after reading the footnote. Rosenstein said that he did not recall the word" speculates'' striking him at the time, but that if the FBI had information at the time of this final FISA application that the research had been funded by the Democratic Party, and that it was going to the Hillary Clinton campaign, he would have expected the FBI to revise the language to be more explicit. He said that if the FBI had such knowledge, the application should say that, or say that a witness told them that, because the additional clarity about the ultimate clients for Steele 's reporting would be a relevant fact, though not necessarily dispositive. Similarly, although he did not read the renewal applications before they were filed, then FBI General Counsel James Baker told us that if the team had known the identity of Simpson 's clients at the time, such that it was not speculation anymore, then Baker would have expected the language to have been updated.

E. FBl 's Source Validation Report Concerning Steele

To establish Steele 's reliability, all four Carter Page FISA applications included the statement that Steele 's reporting" has been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings.''
As described in Chapter Five, members of the Crossfire Hurricane team, including the Supervisory Intel Analyst and SSA 1, told us that the phrase" corroborated and used in criminal proceedings'' was a reference to Steele 's past reporting in the FIFA investigation. Although the team did not review the FIFA case file, SSA 1 stated that they" speculated'' that Steele 's information was corroborated and used in criminal proceedings because they knew Steele had been" a part of, if not predicated, the FIFA investigation'' and was known to have had an extensive source network into Russian organized crime. However, as also described in Chapter Five, no one provided the source characterization statement to Steele 's handling agent( Handling Agent 1) for approval, as required by the Woods Procedures. Handling Agent 1 told us that he would not have approved the statement because most of Steele 's past reporting had not been corroborated and it had never been used in a criminal proceeding.

As we described in Chapter Six, the Crossfire Hurricane team requested that the FBI 's Validation Management Unit( VMU) conduct a formal human source validation review of Steele in early 2017.
VMU completed its evaluation and issued its report on March 23, 2017, which stated that Steele was" suitable for continued operation''[ REDACTED]. However, the validation report stated that Steele 's past reporting in support of the FBI 's Criminal Program had been" minimally corroborated,'' which included Steele 's contributions to the FIFA case. Handling Agent 1 told us that" minimally corroborated'' was consistent with his understanding of the entire collection of Steele 's reporting to the FBI. Although this finding was different from the source characterization statement contained in the Carter Page FISA applications, the two renewal applications filed after the March 2017 validation report did not revise the source characterization statement or at least advise the court of VMU 's finding.

Although SSA 2 and SSA 3, the Headquarters Program Managers who supervised Crossfire Hurricane from FBI Headquarters, had received the validation report and were aware of its findings, we found no evidence that this information was circulated to NYFO, where the Carter Page investigation was being conducted at the time.
Case Agent 1 and Case Agent 6, both of whom were working out of NYFO at the time, told us that they did not recall ever receiving the VMU report or being aware of its findings. Case Agent 6 told us that he would have wanted to know about the findings so that he could have asked questions, and he would have expected that the OI Attorney drafting the next FISA renewal application would have wanted to do the same. The OGC Unit Chief and OGC Attorney also told us they did not recall receiving the VMU report or learning its findings, though the OGC Unit Chief told us she had a general understanding that the FBI officials who reviewed the report thought the information was consistent with the FISA applications.

OI officials told us that they did not recall having been advised of VMU 's findings at any time before the second and third renewals, and the OI Attorney said that, had he known, he would have sought additional information from the FBI about the validation that was undertaken.
Further, Evans told us that the finding sounded like something he would have thought warranted an update to the court in the next FISA application.

F. Joseph Mifsud 's Denials to the FBI

As described in Chapter Three, Priestap and other FBI officials told the OIG that the sole predication for opening the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was the statement George Papadopoulos made to FFG officials that the Trump campaign had received a suggestion or offer of assistance from Russia that involved the anonymous release of disparaging information about then presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
All four Carter Page FISA applications relied upon this information in the probable cause section to help support the FBI 's assessment that Russia was attempting to influence the 2016 presidential election and that those efforts were being coordinated by Carter Page and possibly others associated with the Trump campaign.

During an interview with the FBI in late January 2017, Papadopoulos told the FBI that a Maltese citizen, Joseph Mifsud, who was living in London and serving as a university professor, told him that the Russians had" dirt'' on Clinton in the form of" thousands of emails.''
In an interview in February 2017, Papadopoulos told the FBI that Mifsud told him that Clinton had" problems with her emails.'' In the same interview, Papadopoulos said that the" Russians had her emails'' because the Russians told him( Mifsud) they have them. The FBI determined that Mifsud provided this information to Papadopoulos on April 26, 2016, shortly before Papadopoulos 's meeting with the FFG.

As part of its investigation, the FBI interviewed Mifsud in February 2017, after Renewal Application No. 1 was filed but before Renewal Application No. 2.
According to the FD-302 documenting the interview, Mifsud admitted to having met with Papadopoulos but denied having told him about any suggestion or offer from Russia. Additionally, according to the FD-302, Mifsud told the FBI that" he had no advance knowledge Russia was in possession of emails from the Democratic National Committee( DNC) and, therefore, did not make any offers or proffer any information to Papadopoulos.'' Renewal Application Nos. 2 and 3 did not include these statements Mifsud made to the FBI.

A written case update indicates that Mifsud 's denial was circulated to the Crossfire Hurricane team no later than late April 2017.
Case Agent 6 told us that he was not sure he was aware at the time that Mifsud had been interviewed. The OI officials handling Carter Page FISA applications told us that they either had not been advised of the denial or did not recall being advised at the time. Evans told us that he could not say definitively whether OI would have included this information in subsequent renewal applications without discussing the issue with the team( the FBI and OI), but Evans also said that Mifsud 's denial as described by the OIG sounded like something" potentially factually similarly situated'' to the denials made by Papadopoulos that OI determined should have been included.

G. Carter Page 's Alleged Role in Changing the Republican Platform on Russia 's Annexation of Ukraine

As described previously, all four FISA applications relied upon information attributed in the Steele reporting to Person 1, including that:

[ A] ccording to[ the sub-Source], Candidate# 1 's[ Trump 's] team, which the FBI assesses includes at least Page, agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine as a campaign issue and to raise U.S./ NATO defense commitments in the Baltics and Eastern Europe to deflect attention away from Ukraine.

This assessment was based upon information in Steele Report 95 that purportedly came from Person 1(" Source E'' in Report 95), as well as news articles in July and August 2016 reporting that the Trump campaign adopted a milder tone toward Russia 's annexation of Crimea and influenced changes to the Republican Party 's platform on providing weapons to Ukraine.

We found that, other than this information from Report 95, the FBI 's investigation did not reveal any information to demonstrate that Carter Page had any involvement with the Republican Platform Committee.
We further found that, even after the FBI identified the individuals who were involved with influencing the Republican Platform change on Ukraine( which did not include Page), the FBI never altered their assessment. The FBI also did not include in any subsequent Carter Page FISA applications information that contradicted the assertion that Carter Page was involved with the Republican Platform Committee 's provision on Ukraine, nor did OI provide such information at any time to the FISC.

As discussed in Chapter Ten, in October 2016, Carter Page met with an FBI CHS and, two days later, pertinent statements from that meeting were sent to Case Agent 1, SSA 1, and other agents and analysts on the Crossfire Hurricane team.
The excerpts included statements Page made to the CHS about the platform committee during the Republican National Convention. Page told the CHS that he" stayed clear of that-- there was a lot of conspiracy theories that I was one of them...[ but] totally off the record... members of our team were working on that, and... in retrospect it 's way better off that I... remained at arms length.''

Case Agent 1 told the OIG that he did not believe Carter Page 's statements on the platform issue were" that specific'' and said that Page" minimized'' and" vacillated on some things.''
SSA 1 told us he did not recall why Page 's denial that he participated in the Republican Platform Committee was not included in the first FISA application. Before FISA Renewal Application No. 1, which was filed in January 2017, the OI Attorney did receive the documents containing Page 's October 2016 denials. Yet, the information about the meeting remained unchanged in the renewal applications. The OI Attorney told us that he did not recall the circumstances surrounding this, but he acknowledged that he should have updated the descriptions in the renewal applications to include Page 's denials.

Subsequently, an FBI November 30, 2016 Intelligence Memorandum titled" The Trump Campaign and US-Russia-Ukraine Policy-- A Quick Overview,'' stated:

During a RNC platform sub-committee meeting, Diana Denman, a platform committee member, attempted to insert amendment language calling for the United States to" provide lethal defensive weapons to the Ukrainian government,'' adding that the Ukraine[ sic] was presently" fighting a[ Russian-backed] separatist insurrection.''

In response to Denman 's amendment, two Trump campaign members-- one of whom was Jeff[ JD] Gordon-- approached the subcommittee co-chairman and asked for the amendment to be set aside.
Denman 's amendment was subsequently tabled, and the Trump staffers instead convinced the platform subcommittee to change the language from" lethal defensive weapons'' to calling for" appropriate assistance.''

The Intelligence Memorandum did not identify or reference Carter Page as the second individual involved, or state that he was involved in any capacity in the platform change.
Case Agent 1 said he did not recall reading the November 30 Intelligence Memorandum but said that, at that time, the team was still trying to determine if there was any information connecting Carter Page to the platform change. Case Agent 1 told us that although the FBI did not know who from the Trump campaign approved Carter Page 's trip to Moscow prior to the Republican Convention, and the platform change was made shortly after Page returned from his trip to Russia, the belief was that Page was involved in the platform change and the team was hoping to find evidence of that in their review of the FISA collections of Page 's email accounts.

Additionally, as described in Chapter Six and earlier in this chapter, in January 2017, Steele 's Primary Sub-source provided the FBI with information that was inconsistent with the information Steele reported from Person 1( Source E in Report 95), including the reporting that Page was involved in the Republican Platform Committee changes on Ukraine.
Indeed, the Primary Sub-source made no reference to discussing the Republican Platform Committee or Ukraine provision with Person 1.

Further, on March 16, 2017, Case Agent 1 and Case Agent 6 interviewed Carter Page and asked him about his activities at the 2016 Republican National Convention.
Carter Page told them he had no part in the decision by the Platform Committee to omit the reference to" lethal assistance'' involving Ukraine, but that he supported the omission of the reference. Page said he learned of the policy change upon receiving an email from Gordon dated July 14, 2016, to himself, Papadopoulos, and four members of the campaign foreign policy team. The email, which Page provided to the FBI during the interview, stated, in part:

I hope you had a chance to read some of the press coverage over Platform[ sic].
We are proud to say it is the strongest pro-Israel policy statement in the history of the Republican Party. We are also pleased to say we defeated red line amendments like providing lethal assistance to Ukraine.

That same day, Carter Page replied to this email," Fantastic, J.D. thanks a lot for the useful insights and context.
As for the Ukrainian amendment, excellent work.''

Case Agent 6 sent this email to members of the Crossfire Hurricane investigative team, including SSA 2.
The OI Unit Chief told us that he did not recall specifically seeing this email but said that if the FBI had any information suggesting Carter Page might not have been involved with the Republican platform, then it should have been discussed with OI.

Renewal Application Nos. 2 and 3 included Carter Page 's denials about his involvement in the Republican Platform Committee 's changes on assistance to Ukraine from the March 16 interview with the FBI.
After including these denials in the applications, the renewal applications stated that,

As the FBI believes that Page also holds pro-Russian views and appears to still have been a member of Candidate# 1 's[ Trump 's] campaign in August 2016, the FBI assesses that Page may have been downplaying his role in advocating for the change to Political Party# 1 's[ Republican] platform.

We observed among the NSD 's Counterintelligence and Export Control Section( CES) records an April 2017 version of an investigation outline CES prepared and periodically updated reflecting that Carter Page received an email from Gordon in July 2016 about the platform change and that the email" suggests Page was not involved in the decision.''
Also included in the CES outline were Page 's denials to the FBI. Former CES Chief David Lautman told us that, at that time, the FBI was at an" investigative dead end'' with respect to Page and the platform issue with no new evidence emerging. During his OIG interview, we provided Laufman with the July 2016 email that Carter Page provided to FBI agents during his March 16 interview. After reviewing the email, Lautman told us that he would reword the reference in the CES outline stating that the email" suggests Page was not involved in the decision to'' instead read:" there 's no indication in the email that Page was involved.''

An FBI March 20, 2017 Intelligence Memorandum titled" Overview of Trump Campaign Advisor Jeff D.[ J.D.] Gordon'' again attributed the change in the Republican Platform Committee 's Ukraine provision to Gordon and an unnamed campaign staffer.
The updated memorandum did not include any reference to Carter Page working with Gordon or communicating with the Republican Platform Committee. On May 5, 2017, the Counterintelligence Division updated this Intelligence Memorandum to include open source reporting on the intervention of Trump campaign members during the Republican platform discussions at the Convention to include Gordon 's public comments on his role. This memorandum still made no reference to involvement by Carter Page with the Republican Platform Committee or with the provision on Ukraine.

On June 7, 2017, the FBI interviewed a Republican Platform Committee member.
This interview occurred three weeks before Renewal Application No. 3 was filed. According to the FBI FD-302 documenting the interview, this individual told the FBI that J.D. Gordon was the Trump campaign official that flagged the Ukrainian amendment, and that another person( not Carter Page) was the second campaign staffer present at the July 11 meeting of the National Security and Defense Platform Subcommittee meeting when the issue was tabled.

Although the FBI did not develop any information that Carter Page was involved in the Republican Platform Committee 's change regarding assistance to Ukraine, and the FBI developed evidence that Gordon and another campaign official were responsible for the change, the FBI did not alter its assessment of Page 's involvement in the FISA applications.
Case Agent 6 told us that when Carter Page denied any involvement with the Republican Platform Committee 's provision on Ukraine, Case Agent 6" did not take that statement at face value.'' He told us that at the time of the renewals, he did not believe Carter Page 's denial and it was the team 's" belief'' that Carter Page had been involved with the platform change. We asked Case Agent 6 if the FBI had any information to support its continued assessment that Carter Page was involved in the Republican Platform Committee 's provision on Ukraine, and he provided no further information.

In the next chapter, we discuss the interactions career Department attorney Bruce Ohr had with the Crossfire Hurricane team, the information he provided to the team regarding his interactions with Steele and Glenn Simpson, and the work Ohr 's wife performed for Fusion GPS.
We also describe Ohr 's actions following the 2016 elections relating to the investigation of Paul Manafort.
Highlighted Information
Narrative Web
Times Cloud
Places Cloud
Subjects Cloud
Actions Cloud
Objects Cloud
Contexts Cloud