Senate Intelligence Committee Member Suggests FBI Is Sitting on Information on Trump-Russia Ties

At a hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden pushed FBI Director James Comey to release it by Inauguration Day.

Ron Sachs/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


It was only a couple of questions in the middle of a hearing, but the queries posed to FBI Director James Comey by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) during a Senate Intelligence Committee gathering on Tuesday afternoon had potentially explosive implications, because they suggested that Wyden believes the FBI has been sitting on information regarding ties between Donald Trump’s inner circle and Russia.

The hearing was focused on the intelligence community’s recently released report concluding that Vladimir Putin’s regime had mounted an extensive secret operation to influence the US election in order to help Trump. At the start of the hearing, outgoing Director of National Intelligence James Clapper emphasized that the report did not assess whether the Russian meddling had affected the outcome of the election. This was an indirect rebuke to Trump and his partisans, who have repeatedly said the report concluded the Russian intervention did not affect the results. Comey also noted that Russian hackers had targeted Republican targets but that the FBI had not found evidence that Moscow had penetrated the Trump campaign or current accounts of the Republican National Committee.

The most dramatic exchange came with Wyden’s questions. He noted that several media outlets have reported that Trump campaign associates, including Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman, had maintained connections with Russians tied to Putin. He asked Comey, “Has the FBI investigated these reported relationships?” Comey answered, “I would never comment on investigations…in an open forum.”

Wyden pushed Comey further. He asked whether the FBI chief would declassify information related to this matter and “release it to the American people” by January 20. No, Comey said, adding, “I can’t talk about it.”

Wyden then declared, “The American people have a right to know this.” He continued: “If it doesn’t happen by January 20, I’m not sure it’s going to happen.”

Wyden’s line of questioning indicated that he believes (or knows) the FBI has collected information on Trump ties to Moscow. And Wyden is in a position to know. As a member of the committee, he can see classified material gathered by the FBI and other national security agencies. With these questions to Comey, Wyden was seemingly referring to specific information. In fact, on November 30, he led all the Democratic members in sending a short letter to President Barack Obama that stated, “We believe there is additional information concerning the Russian Government and the U.S. election that should be declassified and released to the public. We are conveying specifics through classified channels.” The letter gave no hint of the nature of this information.

But it is not hard to read between the lines: Intelligence committee members have received classified briefings that included information regarding contacts between the Trump camp and Russians.

In September, Yahoo News reported that US intelligence agencies were probing the contacts between Russian officials and Carter Page, who was identified by the Trump campaign as one of its foreign policy advisers. The New York Times reported in November that the FBI was looking at Manafort’s business ties to Ukrainians who were Putin allies. The newspaper noted, “In classified sessions in August and September, intelligence officials also briefed congressional leaders on the possibility of financial ties between Russians and people connected to Mr. Trump.”

Wyden also apparently fears that once Trump takes over the executive branch, this information—and perhaps any ongoing investigations—would be suppressed.

Shortly after Wyden questioned Comey, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) asked the FBI director if he would say whether any investigations on Trump and Russia were underway. “We never confirm or deny a pending investigation,” Comey replied. King shot back: “The irony of you making that statement I cannot avoid.” This was a clear reference to Comey’s public declarations during the presidential campaign about the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s handling of email at the State Department. Comey responded, “We sometimes think differently about closed investigations.”

So what specifically prompted Wyden to press Comey at the hearing? The American public may never know.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate