Unraveling the coup

Media told America FBI had proof of collusion as bureau was realizing it had nothing

By Post Editorial Board

July 20, 2020 | 7:34pm

Enlarge Image

A memo from Trump-hating (now ex-) Deputy Assistant FBI Director Peter Strzock shows that a February 2017 NY Times Russiagate story was garbage. AFP/Getty Images

Despite what The New York Times and Washington Post were loudly reporting in early 2017, the FBI had failed to find any evidence of Trump-Russia “collusion” — and indeed had found that the central source of those claims was a joke.

This is a key takeaway from the Justice Department’s latest release of documents from the FBI’s investigation.

One shocker is the summary of the long FBI interview that January with the “Primary Subsource” for the infamous Steele dossier — indeed, about the only source.

SEE ALSO

Newly declassified FBI docs cast new doubt on 'Steele dossier'

The FBI had learned that Hillary Clinton’s campaign had paid for British ex-spy Christopher Steele to produce dirt on Donald Trump, and the resulting dossier was pretty much the entire basis for any investigation (barring gossip about a drunken conversation with an on-paper-only Trump adviser).

And now Steele’s “factual” source admitted, essentially, to simply repackaging rumors — some of them from Internet “research.”

Yet the nation’s two most prestigious papers were reporting that the FBI was finding a treasure trove of scandal.

Such as a Feb. 14, 2017, Times piece declaring, “Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.”

Ha! A memo from Trump-hating (now ex-) FBI man Peter Strzok shows that story was garbage: “We have not seen evidence of any individuals affiliated with the Trump team in contact with” intelligence officials. The story also said top FBI officials trusted Steele, when they’d learned he was full of it.

Eager to smear the new president, the Times and Washington Post colleagues were repackaging lies from their anonymous sources. Their front-page news was worse than fake — it was the exact opposite of the truth.