Ken Vogel Covers Up Rudy Giuliani and His Alleged Russian Spies

Amid rising criticism that it is burying the Alexander Smirnov scandal while continuing to flood the market with yet more transphobia and complaints that Biden’s age might be worse than Trump’s promise to let Russia attack NATO states, NYT has added Ken Vogel to the Hunter Biden beat.

Congratulations, Devlin Barrett. You are no longer the most inappropriate mouthpiece to work the dick pic sniffing beat.

Vogel wrote a story with Glenn Thrush that really struggled with basic details about the Hunter Biden investigation. For example, like Devlin in his own story, the men claimed to be unable to understand how David Weiss’ renewed focus on Smirnov’s FD-1023 might explain why Leo Wise said that FARA charges were still on the table on July 26, 2023 when Weiss’ First AUSA had told Chris Clark a month earlier on June 19, “there was not another open or pending investigation.”

In a court filing, they contended that Mr. Smirnov’s false claims “infected” the cases, and suggested, without providing evidence, that prosecutors reneged on a plea deal last summer because they had followed “Mr. Smirnov down his rabbit hole of lies.”

There was no ongoing investigation on June 19. And then, facing pressure from Congress and Bill Barr, David Weiss twice said (the second time in his House Judiciary Committee testimony) that the FD-1023 was part of the newly ongoing investigation. The September 27 interview of Smirnov could not, yet, have been an investigation of Smirnov, because Weiss treats his indictment as a “matter[] that arose” in his investigation of Hunter Biden. Weiss had to have been chasing Smirnov’s manufactured bribery claim, not Smirnov himself, yet.

It’s not the struggle with basic facts about the Hunter Biden investigation that I find so remarkable, though. That’s pretty typical from people on the dick pic sniffing beat.

It’s the shamelessness by longtime Rudy Giuliani mouthpiece Ken Vogel of his cover-up of Rudy’s role in all this.

The men claim, for example, that it was the sheer volume of tips about Hunter Biden that led Bill Barr to set up a secret special intake process starting on January 3, 2020, at a time when there was already an investigation into Hunter Biden that could have … just taken those tips.

For instance, he appears to have told the F.B.I. that a business associate who introduced him to Burisma executives had ties to Russian organized crime, according to notes of this conversation, which do not indicate whether there is proof of the claim.

It is the sort of raw intelligence that law enforcement routinely collects and vets behind closed doors before determining whether to act on it, the investigation into Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings attracted so much of it that the Justice Department created a special intake process.

They make that claim while linking to this NYT story (still one of the best on the Scott Brady side channel), which mentions Rudy Giuliani two dozen times, including in the headline.

They claim Smirnov’s tip was simply shared with Scott Brady’s side channel, when the testimony they link describes Brady asking the FBI to search for Hunter Biden and Burisma (still an unconvincing claim, particularly given Chuck Grassley’s claim that the tip came from an investigation into Mykola Zlochevsky that had been shut down days earlier).

A federal prosecutor involved in screening claims about Mr. Biden’s foreign work testified last year that Mr. Smirnov was an “important confidential human source” who “had been used in other investigations.”

They don’t mention that the Brady transcript they link mentions Rudy 126 times, including descriptions of the interview Brady conducted with Rudy, an interview with someone under active criminal investigation that was not shared with the people conducting that criminal investigation, an interview in which Seth DuCharme had requested Brady participate personally, “so we get a sense of what’s coming out of it,” an interview in which Rudy was less than forthcoming about Rudy’s indirect interview of Zlochevsky the previous year.

But the most astonishing aspect of Ken Vogel’s claim that “the investigation into Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings attracted so much [raw intelligence] that the Justice Department created a special intake process” — again, NYT is making this claim about a side channel to an existing investigation that even Brady says is where such intelligence could actually be vetted, with subpoena power — is that Ken Vogel broke the story of Rudy’s December 2019 trip to meet with, among others, a bunch of people who have since been sanctioned as participants in Russian influence operations.

Vogel described, in real time, Rudy meeting with Kostiantyn Kulyk and Andrii Telizhenko, who both would be sanctioned by Steve Mnuchen’s Treasury on January 11, 2021. Vogel’s story about Andrii Derkach’s sanctioning on September 10, 2020 — again, by Mnuchen’s Treasury — describes that Giuliani met with Derkach on that same trip.

Vogel knows that the leads that Bill Barr set up a special side channel to claim to vet (Brady’s transcript reveals how shoddy his vetting was, including his claim that Smirnov’s travel records were consistent with Smirnov’s bribery allegation when the indictment alleges that the travel records prove his claims to be false) didn’t just appear out of nowhere. It wasn’t the volume of the leads that required some intake process before the leads got shared with the preexisting investigation of Hunter Biden.

It was the fact that the President’s lawyer had solicited help from people US spooks were pretty sure were Russian agents, and rather than warning Rudy off that effort, DOJ instead set up a special accommodation via which DOJ might share information from Russian spies with those investigating Trump’s rival’s son, a special accommodation that could, and did, protect Rudy from any legal consequences for soliciting campaign help from Russian spies.

And then by some remarkable coincidence, while purportedly vetting all this dirt solicited by Rudy Giuliani, Scott Brady went out and through still unexplained means found the guy who happened to be willing to fabricate a claim about Burisma bribing Joe Biden.

Only, it probably wasn’t a wild coincidence. The Smirnov indictment ties Smirnov’s dangles of claims against Biden to this article about Rudy soliciting help from Andrii Derkach.

Ken Vogel knows Rudy’s role in the side channel that led to the Smirnov claim as well as anybody. But his story about the side channel covered up Rudy’s role — two dozen mentions at one of his links and over a hundred at the other — and in the process covered up the Russian spies that necessitated the side channel.

Update: In a really good timeline of the back history of the FD-1023, Glenn Kessler describes that Bill Barr doesn’t want to talk about it.

Barr spoke briefly to The Fact Checker, off the record, before hanging up the phone.

Update: Jerry Nadler has asked Michael Horowitz to investigate Scott Brady for, among other things, his misleading testimony.

Update: Fixed year on Rudy’s trip to visit the Russian spies.

image_print
58 replies
  1. EW Moderation Team says:

    A reminder to all new and existing community members participating in comments:

    — We have been moving to a new minimum standard to support community security over the last year. Usernames should be unique and a minimum of 8 letters.

    — We do not require a valid, working email, but you must use the same email address each time you publish a comment here. **Single use disposable email addresses do not meet this standard.**

    — If you have been commenting here but have less than 1000 comments published and been participating less than 10 years as of October 2022, you must update your username to match the new standard.

    Thank you.

  2. Christine Patterson says:

    It is/was apparent that Bill Barr was willing to accommodate Trump and his confederates to achieve his view of an “Imperial Presidency”. Why/when did Bill Barr change direction? Why did he not assist the “Imperial Presidency” stay in power?

    • Rugger_9 says:

      I suspect AG Barr assessed the prospects of success between the planning and the team executing said plans and realized he did not want to be caught up in the blowback after the failure. So Barr took the easy way out and has been in a redemption tour since, with lots of support from the NYT.

    • Shadowalker says:

      For the same reason he didn’t open an investigation into Joe Biden in 2020 before the election based on Smirnov, despite his memo expanding the prohibition of investigations that would have an impact on an election. He assigned a group of prosecutors to look for evidence of any election fraud. They sent him a letter that they all signed back that there was none, or at least nothing that would change the results. If he tried, there would have been an internal revolt of the whole department.

  3. wetzel-rhymes-with says:

    There once was a man named Ken Vogel
    All the ladies he could not but to ogle
    So like Adam and Eve
    To a forest near Kyiv
    Guiliani sent him Yulia in Chernobyl

    There once was a man from Politico
    They say he could make a story go
    Away in a day
    Noone can say
    But what does Vogel really know?

  4. Peterr says:

    One would think that the NYT, being the local paper in the little burg where local boy Rudy has had a longtime lifetime problem with the truth (whether about his time as mayor, time after his mayorality, or even his social life), would take anything involving Rudy with a sizable grain of salt.

    One would, of course, be wrong.

    • BobBobCon says:

      It’s worth noting that both Vogel and Thrush are 2017 recruits to the Times by Carolyn Ryan when she was political editor and then deputy managing editor for the paper.

      Margaret Sullivan’s account of Ryan is pretty eye opening. Ryan personally negotiated the Times’ publication of the hit job Clinton Cash, personally edited the Times’ false claim that Clinton was facing criminal charges and then led the effort to avoid issuing a correction, then directed their disastrous coverage of the 2016 campaign.

      https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/10/but-her-emails-behind-the-new-york-times-maddening-hillary-clinton-coverage

      Maggie Haberman and Jeremy Peters are both Ryan hires too – she has a long record of finding and elevating reporters with shady histories of promoting the views of rightwing sources in the guise of news reporting.

      • wetzel-rhymes-with says:

        There once was a woman named Ryan
        Who came to the Times like a lion
        With Vogel and Thrush
        Keep beating the bush
        And out pops Peters and Haberman

      • nighthowl says:

        I appreciate that info; I watched Ryan yesterday or day before run from one MSNBC show to the next, emphatically saying that the arrest of FBI informant has no bearing on gun or tax charges.
        Never giving space to the possible bad intentions of Republican Congress critters.

        • wetzel-rhymes-with says:

          All this with the NY Times and a journalist like Ryan or Haberman has a shamelessness like Trump’s and Elon’s. They are indifferent to what you think. Nobody can look down on the NY Times, but there’s something more in the expressive dimension Carolyn Ryan is saying with the GOP and other corrupt entities who desperately want this story to go away. Bill Barr is a made man, so everyone in the circle at the NY Times will just have to self immolate, I think, before letting this get to him.

      • pseudonymous in nc says:

        Think also about how during that period the NYT elevated Patrick Healy, a failed theater critic who covers politics like it’s drama and who had an axe to grind against Hillary dating back to 2008. Healy’s now up top in the opinion section while running focus groups that are all about… draaaaaaaama.

    • Robot-seventeen says:

      I dunno. It’s been standard practice to use intelligence mills to justify all kinds of nonsense for political purposes since at least the forties. By now it’s time honored and legacy media such as the NYT knows they have to play ball when known suspect sources are used – “Curveball” for example. How many sources are vetted by head or strapline editors? That’s as far as most people get. It’s hard not to be cynical.

  5. Upisdown says:

    Thank you for mentioning the Kessler piece. I had just finished reading and commenting on it before coming here. Glenn did a pretty nice job documenting how dickish Bill Barr behaved in this 1023 scandal. Kessler and Philip Bump provide the best coverage of the Hunter Biden saga for WaPo, IMO.

  6. freebird says:

    The plausibility of this story rests on Vogel believing that Biden took a bribe. Biden went to Ukraine in the midst of corrupt Putin puppet Yanukoych being ousted from power. Ukraine was utterly corrupt and on the verge of collapse. After the Maidan revolution, the new Ukrainian government asked the west for funding and help in rooting out corruption.

    In two speeches, one at the US embassy in Kiev in 2015 and in Bankova in 2017, Biden excoriated Russia and Putin for its revanchist policy toward Ukraine. These speeches apparently irked Putin and frankly set in motion the Russian disinformation campaign where Trump and Giuliani were cooking up on what John Bolton called a “drug deal.”

    Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager, was connected to Russia through the puppet Yanukovych and filtered disinformation to Giuliani and Trump.

    • timbozone says:

      Are you sure that it wasn’t the Russian invasion and seizure of Crimea in 2014, the year previous, that might have some bearing on all this?

      • freebird says:

        This is a part of the continuum of Putin’s goal to reconstitute the USSR and his anger at the west, especially at the USA for the dissolution of the USSR. Hilliary Clinton was vexatious and generated Putin’s venom. Frankly, this is why he supported Trump who is what they call a useful idiot.

        The Munich speech in 2007 outlined his vituperation at the west and then with Trump he found a partner who recently told Putin to attack NATO countries.

        • timbozone says:

          Russian television was priming for a fight with the West many years before that, likely a directive begun early in Putin’s first term.

  7. Zugzwang says:

    But do you think the Brady bunch (Brady, Weiss, Barr, etc) will face any actual accountability? Barr is too sly and has a lifetime of experience covering up his tracks in a thick veneer of plausible deniability and bullshit. The closest he must have come to any consequences must have been April 2019 after he whitewashed the Mueller report, and there were some calls to impeach him. Luckily for democracy, Pelosi and others put an end to that pipe dream.

  8. Error Prone says:

    So Treasury sanctions a handful, Ukrainians, days after J6, days before Jan. 20, 2021, and Biden taking office. A guy in LA who was doing or trying to do crypto deals in Ukraine, 2017, got inventive in 2020 with a story to an as yet unidentified FBI handler – unidentified and having not yet openly testified of record. It has the appearance of a story now with loose ends, a story that could grow legs, or have legs stunted. Rudy mentioned in media then, not so much now. Rudy now deep in Chapter 11 after nobody helped with lawyer fees. Were Rudy to turn and cut a deal . . . Were Rudy to have turned already, when might that cat be let out of the bag, on whose time frame? The slowness of things coming out – and the sequence is confusing to me. Does Smirnov seem to have much chance to cut a deal, given the charge is he lied big time so that whatever testimony he may offer has that taint?

    Help me understand, or are we all equally confused and uncertain?

    • freebird says:

      This story never made sense. To believe this episode, the briber, Zlochevsky, a member of the government, would have to have been a part of a sting on Joe Biden. Stinging Biden would have vitiated the billions in foreign aide that was coming in making fewer dollars to invest or steal and further destabilizing the country.

    • Error Prone says:

      I am unclear on travel per passports as I never have done so. Are visas required for countries to be visited, and in the EU once in travel between nations can be done? Or is that only for EU-nation citizens? Can visas be obtained under one passport or another for a dual citizen person, where travel happened per an Israeli passport was not documented in a U.S. passport? Presumably in vetting Smirnov, he was asked to show travel in 2015 or 2016 as he stated, per examination of both passports? Now both are impounded, so one gov agency holding them can be subject to a warrant from DOJ? Are we to assume that the indictment assertion, no travel record per Smirnov was a subject in 2023, but not vetted reasonably earlier – and that checking both passports in 2023 was a hinge in Weiss vetting? But not done by Brady?? Does that make sense?

      • freebird says:

        From my understanding, it depends on where you are going. It is best to check the rules of the place you are visiting.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        The US has agreements with many countries allowing its passport holders visa-free entry for varying lengths of time: 30-90 days is common. After that, the visitor is expected to leave or obtain formal approval to remain.

        For many non-EU passport holders, once inside an EU country, travel within the EU is unrestricted, for a similar period. Some countries require visas for entry of any duration. Australia is one of them. China also requires visas for most passport holders.

        The rules change frequently and are becoming more onerous, requiring additional background checks and submission of biometric data. The EU and neighboring Schengen Area countries will require an additional travel document starting in May 2025. The US itself is among the harder countries for foreign passport holders to enter.

  9. Wirenaut says:

    Should “… and though still unexplained means …” be “… and through still unexplained means …”?

      • earthworm says:

        pj:
        Before 2016?
        You must be referring the era of the estimable Miller!
        Miller of the tubes, Miller of the WMD, Miller of the mushroom clouds, Miller, the star reporter of the NYT.
        She did jail time, no?

        • BRUCE F COLE says:

          Miller did serve time for contempt of court for her refusal to spill the beans on Scooter Libby. The jail time worked, and she helped convict him (but not for outing Plame). He never served though: Bush commuted his 2.5 year sentence before he was locked up. Trump then pardoned him altogether 11 years later.

          Perhaps worse, with regard to Miller, was her having given the DC Bar the pretext for reinstating his law license because she recanted her sworn trial testimony in a self-serving pile of incinerator-fodder disguised as a memoir. He was reinstated 5 days before the 2016 election.

          There is no God.

        • Theodora30 says:

          Back in the 90s the Times was used as a mouthpiece for the Richard Mellon-Scaife funded Arkansas Project’s lies about the Clintons. Scaife’s henchmen peddled their false claims about Whitewater to the Times’s Jeff Gerth and we were off. The rest of the media followed the Times’s lead and we were off. After Whitewater the media jumped on Travelgate, Filegate, Chinagate/Wen Ho Lee, etc.
          After Ken Starr had to admit there was nothing to any of those stories I naively thought the Times would not allow itself to be humiliated like that again. Their WMD debacle proved me wrong.

  10. pseudonymous in nc says:

    Assigning VOGEL to the Hunter Biden / Ukraine beat is like putting Ahab in charge of the whale desk.

  11. Fancy Chicken says:

    When I read the Vogel piece yesterday I simply thought it was just embarrassingly shitty reporting considering the number of smaller outlets that are reporting about the back channel and Barr and Trump’s involvement.

    Now I’m just angry to find out that Vogel actually has a handle on the truth but instead just spun a flat out lie about the genesis of the Brady channel.

    I don’t normally do the comments section at NYT but I think I’m now going to when they are committing so many howlers that support a Trumpist agenda. That and sending letters to editors are all that us little people can do.

  12. Purple Martin says:

    Glenn Kessler sends out a regular Friday email teaser for his weekly Fact Checker column. The following appeared in today’s email, teasing the article Marcy mentions in her update to this post.

    Both items end with a click the link for more. But, perhaps one could instead just regularly read Emptywheel, and already know this. Seems likely Glenn Keesler does!

    A detailed review of information contained in the indictment, Brady’s testimony before congressional investigators, public statements and other documents shows that — absent Barr’s creation of a Biden task force — Smirnov’s allegations probably never would have appeared in the FBI document that led to his indictment and to the possible collapse of the Republicans’ impeachment case with Smirnov as its star.

    Click the link to read a detailed timeline of the years-long events ending in Smirnov’s arrest.

    Also: Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), who heads the impeachment inquiry, has suggested that two Ukraine-related documents referenced in special counsel Robert K. Hur’s report concerning Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents might have ended up informing or been part of emails found on the laptop that the president’s son Hunter left at a computer repair shop in Delaware. But that turned out to be wrong. Click the link for more.

  13. Duranty Would Be Proud says:

    I always believed that the NYTimes knows when it’s peddling dishonest trash and don’t want to hear you plebians complain that they’re peddling disinformation – they turn off the comments.

  14. Spooky Mulder says:

    Lots of Marcy and Emptywheel mentions in the comments section of the Kessler timeline. (Including my own).

    • Error Prone says:

      Someone once told me it’s unwise to get in a pissing match with somebody who buys ink by the barrel, but what do I know.

  15. Error Prone says:

    Worth mention, WaPo, “10 Republicans who treated the Biden bribery claim like gospel,” — https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/02/21/10-republicans-who-treated-biden-bribery-claim-like-gospel/

    These people got elected. To Congress! Because of their cautious sagacity?

    Also AP reports Judge Wright, in LA, will hold a detention hearing in LA, it being his order that preempted the Magistrate’s Vegas determination (with the indictment filed in LA). https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-alexander-smirnov-fbi-informant-c4e6b13e254bfd051c6e421a6b9ff4e3

  16. earlofhuntingdon says:

    The essence of all these motions is that Trump’s designation of records as personal – and any other conduct that might violate relevant law – is unreviewable not because his is an accurate reading of the applicable statute. His conduct is unreviewable because everything a President does is immune from review and liability, because any immunity he had as President is his for life, and because he’s Donald Trump. LMFAO.

    • Overt_Act says:

      It strikes me that Trump is trying to pull a “Sovereign Citizen” argument, with the twist that having been president implies he has sovereign immunity for life. This matches his endless attempts to use the courts to deny all accountability. In the end he is ultimately like one of those bozos who prints out a meaningless jumble of pseudo-legalese and pulls it out when a cop stops him for speeding, and then claims the law has no jurisdiction over him.

  17. fatvegan000 says:

    Horowitz? Really? Can’t there be a different IG? Could Biden have replaced him when he took office? This is depressing.

  18. Zinsky123 says:

    A little slow to comment on this post, but I remember when Guiliani was bopping around Europe with Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, thinking how odd and out-of-bounds it was to have the President’s consigliere in a foreign country, digging for dirt on the President’s primary political opponent with a couple of two-bit thugs! Why didn’t the Democrats raise more of a stink at the time? Trump so stretched the boundaries of normalcy that people let things go by that should have been nipped in the bud at the time. The Democrats gave these really dumb and thuggish people four years to manufacture nonsense that they are still trying to stomp out!

    • BRUCE F COLE says:

      Well you might say that the first impeachment of Trump went some distance in that direction.

      As for “nipping in the bud,” realism dictates that a sitting POTUS who doesn’t play by the rules (and by extension his minions) isn’t vulnerable to that kind of summary dispatch. And this post is all about the broad set of institutional CJ accomplices that had a part in it, which makes “nipping it in the bud” a fantasy at best.

      The federal government was virtually under mob control at the time. We’re lucky we’ve gotten to this point, imo (though Garland certainly could have made getting here happen more quickly).

Comments are closed.