Part 3: The Untold Story of the Russia Collusion Records

TOP LINE

This week, the nation’s top intelligence official, the Director of National Intelligence, declassified Part 3 of the Russia collusion records.  This batch zeroed in on intelligence that underpinned claims the Russian President had developed a clear preference for candidate Trump. 

While adjectives like ‘bombshell’ and ‘explosive’ were tossed around on some cable news channels, the coverage on Mainstream Media outlets was scant.

This is where Occam’s Razor applies: the simple, straight forward answer is the correct one. 

Beginning in 2016, many high profile reporters and news organizations were rewarded for coverage of the Trump-Russia scandal that turned out to be deeply flawed.  Their news coverage divided the country. 

Faced with declassified intelligence records that expose flawed, or at best, incomplete reporting, some news outlets are reluctant to revisit the Russia story. They have effectively ghosted their audience on the matter.

By not taking responsibility and correcting/completing the record they helped create, reporters are further undermining trust in their own work and their organizations.

DEEP DIVE

I vividly remember the moment the Russia collusion story broke.  

It was the late summer, early fall of 2016. At the time, I was the chief intelligence correspondent at Fox News Channel.  I was asked to confirm reporting that appeared in a handful of media outlets. It claimed the Russian government had tried to co-opt candidate Trump, and the information had been shared with the FBI.

By 2016, I had been reporting in Washington D.C. for about 15 years, posted here after the 9/11 terrorist attacks as the first network reporter assigned to the homeland security beat.

By that time, qualified as a deeply sourced reporter, neither current nor former government officials could confirm to me the Trump collusion reports. I couldn’t figure out where the intelligence originated and with which intelligence agency.

Asked by a Fox supervisor about my progress on the Russia story, I said….

FREE PREVIEW 🔓️ 

Catherine Herridge Reports Is Backed By Readers Like You

Our team relies on your subscriptions. No corporations. No pressure from advertisers. We can follow the facts wherever they lead.

Please consider supporting our independent, fact based journalism. Your support makes it possible!

… “I can’t seem to get it. I don't think it’s real.” 

My gut instinct was that something about the story was off. I was under a great deal of pressure to get the story because competitors at CNN,  MSNBC and other outlets seemed to confirm new Russia collusion details with ease. It didn’t make sense.

Looking more deeply at the sources my competitors quoted as the basis for the Russia collusion reporting, I noticed an immediate red flag.  In a Mother Jones story authored by David Corn, the description of the source was peculiar and not typical in Washington D.C. national security circles.  

Corn wrote, “...a former senior intelligence officer for a Western country who specialized in Russian counterintelligence tells Mother Jones that in recent months he provided the bureau with memos, based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump—and that the FBI requested more information from him.”

We now know the “former senior intelligence officer for a Western country” was Christopher Steele, a former MI6 agent behind the dossier which bears his name.  It was not an authoritative report provided to the FBI as corporate media reporters suggested. Rather, it was political opposition research, largely funded by the Clinton campaign.

The remainder of this newsletter is for paid subscribers only.

Catherine Herridge Reports: Telling the stories we could not tell before. Where the facts have a power all their own.

✅ Whistleblower investigations that demand government accountability and get results with long overdue benefits awarded to US service members.

✅ Analysis that is fact driven and unafraid to challenge the prevailing narrative.

✅ Unlimited access to our online archive where you can read previous editions of the newsletter.