There is a court in Alexandria, Va. A jury acquitted a think tank analyst of lying to the FBI about his role in the creation of a discredited Dossier about Donald Trump.
Special Counsel John Durham is investigating how the FBI conducted its own investigation into allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.
The first two cases ended with guilty pleas and no jail time.
As the verdict was read, Danchenko didn't show much emotion. After the clerk read the not guilty verdict, his wife wiped away tears.
After the hearing, Stuart Sears spoke to reporters and said that he had known for a long time that his client was not guilty. The American public is aware of that as well.
After two days of deliberations, the jury came to a decision. There were no real disagreements among the jury and they just wanted to be thorough in reviewing the counts, according to one juror.
It was a big blow for Durham. The three-year investigation failed to produce evidence that met the expectations of Trump's supporters. Two of the cases that Durham took to trials ended in full exonerations because of conduct uncovered by the Justice Department's inspector general.
While we are disappointed in the outcome, we respect the jury's decision and thank them for their service. I would like to thank the investigators and the prosecution team for their hard work in trying to get the truth in this case.
He said the same thing after the first trial was over.
The first of the three cases to look into the origins of the Steele Dossier was the Danchenko case.
It was claimed that the Russians could have blackmailed Trump for his encounters with prostitutes in Moscow. When the document became public, Trump derided it as fake news.
According to his own admission, Danchenko was responsible for 80% of the raw intelligence in the dossier and half of the analysis, though trial testimony indicated that he was shocked and dismayed by how Steele presented the material.
If Danchenko had been more forthcoming about his sources, the FBI might not have treated the document so credulously. Even though the FBI never was able to corroborate a single allegation in the dossier, material from it was used to support warrants for Carter Page's surveillement.
According to prosecutors, Danchenko lied about who his sources were for the material he gave to Steele. According to the charges against Danchenko, he fabricated one of his sources when he was interviewed by the FBI to find out how he got the information he provided.
The FBI was told that some of the material came when he received an anonymous call from a man he thought was Sergei Millian, the former president of the Russian American Chamber of Commerce.
The story made no sense, according to prosecutors. They said that phone records show no evidence of a call, and that Danchenko had no reason to believe that Millian, a Trump supporter, was suddenly going to be willing to give unflattering information about Trump to a stranger.
Lawyers for Danchenko say that he never said he talked with Millian. He thought that Millian might have been the caller. He shouldn't be convicted of a crime for guessing at the FBI's intentions.
His lawyers say he had reason to believe the caller was Millian. Danchenko reached out to Millian over email after a mutual acquaintances brokered a connection over email.
His phone records don't show a call because he told the FBI that the call might have been over a secure mobile app for which he had no records.
After listening to closing arguments on four counts, the jury began deliberations. The fifth count was thrown out on Friday by the district judge.
Before the trial began, Trenga almost threw out all of the charges because of the legal strength of the defense.
That's right.
Tucker is a writer for the Associated Press.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
