The FBI’s counterintelligence mission is a hotly debated issue. Many commentators and political aspirants have been critical of its role, especially with regard to Russia Gate. These commentators, social media personalities, and politicians have advocated for abolishment or some form of restructuring that would, at minimum, strip the FBI of its counterintelligence mission.
The locus of Russia Gate was the notorious seventh floor of FBI Headquarters (HQ), particularly the Counterintelligence (CI) Division. Peter Strzok was positioned as Deputy Assistant Director of the CI Division, having previously supervised the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s felonious misuse of a personal email server to store Top Secret information. At the time, Strzok was the Section Chief of the CI Division’s Counterespionage Section. Though there were other players involved, Strzok was at the center of the controversies that first brought widespread public scrutiny of FBI CI Division politicization.
The weaponization, in certain instances, of the FBI has been established beyond any reasonable doubt. FBI HQ is infected with Trump Derangement Syndrome, and has been all too willing to go along with DOJ mandates to over reach. Recent reporting disclosed that some FBI senior executives, such as former Assistant Director in Charge of the Washington Field Office Steven D’Antuono, felt that the execution of a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago would be highly problematic. D’Antuono told the Washington Post he “was worried about it increasing distrust in us.” He went on to say, “We all thought this posed a risk to us both professionally and personally…I can’t impress upon you the pressure.”
Recommended
The coloring of the FBI as a monolith of corruption and partisan sentiment is clearly inaccurate. Though D’Antuono’s statements after the fact leave one wondering if more robust efforts to forestall the events that led to the Mar-a-Lago raid should have been undertaken. The reality is, the FBI employs roughly thirteen thousand special agents. Broad brushing thousands people with incredibly varied backgrounds in categorical terms is incredibly naïve at best, and at worst, profoundly dishonest. What can be said with a great degree of certainty is, executive management at the headquarters level is responsible for much of what the public has come to distrust about the FBI.
Despite all the public relations debacles, headquarters tampering, congressional furor, and social media clickbait farming, the FBI’s CI work continues and produces results which contribute substantively to America’s national security.
Most recently, a husband and wife Chinese spy team were arrested last Tuesday after an FBI CI investigation revealed the pair, Linda Sun and Christopher Hu, infiltrated New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) and disgraced New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s (D) offices. Sun used her position as a high ranking aide to derail efforts to support Taiwan. The couple received millions in payouts from China for their intelligence collection and influence efforts.
This textbook CI case highlights two critical points. First, FBI CI cases are fundamentally criminal in nature. The primary objective of any FBI counterintelligence agent is to investigate, disrupt, and bring to trial foreign agents of influence, or intelligence officers, who violate the Espionage Act of 1917 or Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). I know this because I was an FBI CI agent.
In this case, Sun and Hu have been charged under FARA. CI cases may remain open for extended periods of time to allow for the exploitation of intelligence, but the ultimate objective is criminal prosecution. Anyone who alleges that CI cases are “circular” (purposefully ambiguous) is ignorant and shouldn’t be taken seriously. Second, the unique characteristic of having a domestic CI agency with arrest powers, such as the FBI, actually acts as a guard rail against encroachments on civil rights. Sun and Hu will be tried in accordance with every applicable element of criminal procedure, ensuring due process. If CI investigations were untethered from the strict requirements of criminal procedure, civil rights abuses would be far easier to perpetrate. Those who advocate for denuding the FBI of its CI mission are actually increasing the likelihood of weaponization and abuse.
On Wednesday of last week, DOJ announced indictments based on FBI investigations into Russian influence operations. Two Russian nationals, Kostiantyn Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva have been charged with violations of FARA. Both individuals were employed by RT (formerly Russia Today), a Russian state-controlled media outlet. Attorney General Merrick Garland stated that both individuals were involved in “a $10 million [dollar] scheme to create and distribute content to U.S. audiences with hidden Russian government messaging.”
RT is a known Russian propaganda outlet and has featured interviews with social media figures like former FBI Agent Steve Friend. On an RT show called “Whistleblowers” Friend, while a suspended FBI employee, appeared with host John Kiriakou. A former CIA officer, Kiriakou pled guilty to disclosing classified information concerning a fellow CIA officer, and was sentenced to 30 months in prison in 2013. Friend’s unauthorized media appearance was cited by the FBI as a reason (among several others) for the suspension of his security clearance. It doesn’t strain credulity to understand the FBI’s position on this point or why it might be interested in interviewing people associated with RT.
Many have expressed concern about the timing of this Russian FARA indictment. It does smack of Russia Gate, though it is another example of an FBI CI case taken up by DOJ for criminal prosecution. And, a number of social media influencers have been contacted by the FBI for voluntary interviews about unwitting associations.
Whether this is an elaborate Op by DOJ to ensnare MAGA supporters has yet to be substantiated, but when dealing with any law enforcement agency, it’s always wise to have representation during an interview. If you’re the subject of an investigation, it’s your right to have representation present. It’s certainly safe to assume that FBI agents are sincere; however, their interests are not yours. Be polite, but be smart. Aside from a few notorious and public exceptions, you’re likely talking to a fellow patriot.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member