–
(CNN) –– An FBI attorney who worked on the surveillance warrant against Carter Page –– former adviser to politics outside of Donald Trump–– will plead guilty this Friday of making a false claim in an email as part of an inquiry into the investigation of the Russian plot.
Kevin Clinesmith plans to admit an email tampering charge to another official in 2017, which said Page was not a prior government source, when he had been.
The charge this Friday represents the first public outcome of the long-awaited prosecutor John Durham investigation, and will likely be political cannon fodder for Trump amid a storm of negative headlines about his handling of the pandemic of coronavirus.
“Kevin deeply regrets tampering with the email,” Clinesmith’s attorney Justin Shur said in a statement on Friday. “It was never his intention to mislead the court or his colleagues, as he believed that the information he transmitted was accurate. But Kevin understands that what he did was wrong and accepts responsibility, “he added.
Judge James Boasberg of the District Court of U.S in Washington and who also presides over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that approved the orders against Page, was assigned to handle the Clinesmith criminal case this Friday, according to the court file.
Trump began his briefing on Friday afternoon with a brief reference to Clinesmith.
That’s just the beginning… what happened should never happen again. He pleads guilty, something terrible, something terrible. The fact is that they spied on my campaign and caught them, and we will be knowing more codas, “said the president.
However, the court documents stipulating the single charge against Clinesmith do not mention any broader allegation of conspiracy by FBI investigators against Trump, a point the president has made frequently. Instead, they show that another FBI official, who signed the fourth warrant of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), raises concerns about whether Page is a CIA source and was seeking Email evidence when Clinesmith downplayed the relationship between Page and the CIA.
CIA process
The documents also allow a look at the bureaucratic process used by the CIA – which is named as another government agency in the court file – to record its interaction with an American, and the efforts that an employee of the entity made with the The objective was to ensure that there was a report of your history with Page.
Clinesmith was a lower-level FBI attorney working on early investigations into Russia related to Page and other advisers linked to Trump, an investigation then known as the Crossfire Hurricane.
The documentation Clinesmith worked on sought to support surveillance requests on Page in 2016 and 2017, who by then he believed the FBI was acting as an agent for Russia. Page was never charged with any crime.
The CIA had told the Crossfire Hurricane team in mid-2016 that Page, years earlier, had been a contact providing information on interactions with individuals associated with Russian intelligence. Investigators obtained a court order to monitor Page and renewed it three times in 2017. In the fourth extension, Clinesmith changed an email from the CIA, which stated that Page was a source, at the time of forwarding the information to a supervisor. The email Clinesmith amended noted that Page, who is called Individual # 1 in the indictment, “was not a ‘source,'” according to court documents.
«The accused altered the original email of June 15, 2017, a message that came from a link [de otra agencia gubernamental], by adding the words ‘and is not a source’ to the email, giving the impression that the link [de la agencia] had written in the email that Individual # 1 ‘was not a source,’ ”prosecutors wrote of the charge against Clinesmith.
Investigation Against Page Reveals Email Error
Clinesmith’s email bug was discovered by Justice Department Independent Inspector General Michael Horowitz last year. Horowitz reported in December that he had referred the matter for further investigation, and Clinesmith’s handling of the surveillance request became part of US Attorney John Durham’s job to understand the intelligence and the steps taken in the early stages of the Russian investigation.
The inspector general also found highly partisan messages sent by Clinesmith, insulting Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.
Despite the error, Horowitz did not find that the Clinesmith-related issues weakened the overall validity of the surveillance. Subsequently, the Justice Department ruled that two renewals of surveillance on Page were invalid, while Durham continued to investigate the initial intelligence and focus of the inquiry into Russia by the FBI and national security officials.
Trump focuses on Durham Russia investigation
Trump has increasingly targeted the investigation as a means of redemption after years of intense scrutiny over his 2016 presidential campaign and rule by special counsel Robert Mueller, and has used unsubstantiated conspiracies about the beginning of the Russia investigation under the Obama administration to try to point out former Vice President Joe Biden, his virtual rival in the 2020 election contest.
Durham’s pace of work, however, has become a source of frustration for the White House, and the News This Friday comes after complaints from the president and promises from Attorney General William Barr.
Barr anticipated the announcement late Thursday during an interview with a Fox News show Trump is known to watch regularly, just hours after the president told the network that he hoped Durham and Barr would not shy away from further conclusions. serious and seemed to underestimate the possible charges against Clinesmith.
“I hope they are doing their job, I hope they are not politically correct and say, well, you know, we want to finish, let’s just get the lower guys who forged documents to go to FISA,” Trump said.
Durham, a longtime federal prosecutor from Connecticut, was chosen by attorneys general on both sides to lead sensitive special investigations, and is known for being meticulous, if slow. An investigation into the CIA’s use of so-called enhanced detainee interrogation techniques, which it conducted under the Obama administration, took about three years to complete.
Barr had pointed out earlier this year that Durham’s work could be completed by the summer, although that date has been extended into the winter, as Durham has negotiated with witnesses for cooperation. The pandemic also took its toll, Barr explained.
Among Trump’s wish list of political heads are former Obama national security officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and allegations about his handling of intelligence regarding Trump still They are being reviewed by Durham. None have been charged with any crime.
Durham’s recent efforts
Some glimpses about other aspects of the investigation have emerged from witnesses questioned in recent months.
Neither Brennan nor Clapper have met with Durham yet. A spokesperson for Brennan said that discussions for an interview have been ongoing and that one issue remains: Brennan requires access to documents from her time at the CIA, which the Trump administration has blocked.
In recent weeks, James Baker, a former FBI general counsel during the Russia investigation, sat down with Durham’s team for an interview and soon returned for other follow-up questions, according to a person briefed on the matter.
A Washington federal court investigative jury, which Durham was using as part of its investigation, has also resumed its work, people familiar with the matter said.
Barr said Wednesday that his goal was to publish some of Durham’s findings before the November election, but he also opened up the possibility that the review could be extended further.
“We all know the schedule and we are not going to do anything with the purpose of affecting an election, but we are trying to get some things done before the vote,” Barr told conservative commentator Buck Sexton.
Durham, meanwhile, has remained silent as his investigation progresses, with the exception of an unusual statement in December that refuted a conclusion by the Justice Department inspector general about the advisability of opening the Russia investigation.
At the time, Durham said he disagreed with a finding included in the inspector general’s report that said the FBI had good cause to open its 2016 counterintelligence investigation, basing the statement, he said, on evidence from people in the United States. United States and outside the United States, which may have been unreachable for inspector general investigators.
CNN’s Evan Pérez contributed to this report.
–
