FBI Dismissed Source Claims of CCP Interference in 2020 Election to Avoid Contradicting Director, Documents Show
Udumbara
The FBI in 2020 blocked a probe into suspected Chinese interference into U.S. elections for fear of contradicting then-director Christopher Wray’s public testimony, newly released records show.
The FBI headquarters in the emails cited reliability questions as the rationale for the recall and instructed the Albany office, which had put out the file, to reinterview the source for further information.
The re-issue never materialized despite additional context from the Albany office supporting the initial claim, with one email from the headquarters stating, when asked about the reason, that “the reporting will contradict Director Wray’s testimony.”
‘No Reason to Recall’
The intelligence report that circulated on Sept. 25, 2020, originated from a confidential source who said that the Chinese authorities had produced a large amount of fake U.S. driver’s licenses late that August and “secretly exported” them to the United States, allowing for “tens of thousands of Chinese students and immigrants sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party” to vote for President Donald Trump’s rival, Joe Biden, in the impending election. The source said a subsource supplied the information, which they obtained from unidentified Chinese officials, the report said.Around noon on Sept. 25, an Albany agent told others involved in preparing the report that the FBI headquarters had requested to get advance notice on any future election-related report dissemination.
“Something in the IIR process is definitely going well if we receive a call within a few hours from HQ about one of our IIRs. Nicely done!” the agent wrote, using the agency verbiage for intelligence information reports. The agent added that the report “was coordinated and disseminated in textbook fashion.”
That afternoon, an email from the Albany office said “we have no reason to recall at this point,” noting that they have been actively trying to recontact the source.
.
Minutes later, though, the FBI’s criminal investigative division emailed, saying that the deputy assistant directors for the counterintelligence and cyber divisions—Nikki Floris and Tonya Ugoretz—were “directly requesting” the report’s recall until the source is re-interviewed.
Three days later, an email from Albany informed the involved FBI agents that the headquarters had set a new oversight requirement regarding election-related information.
“Not surprisingly, all raw reporting concerning the election will now require HQ coordination, which was not required as of last week,” the agent wrote.
The source met the Albany FBI contact that day and provided the name, age, and other details about the China-based individual who raised the allegations. The two had got in touch on Telegram, the source told the FBI, describing the China-based person as a “cautious individual,” “not a member of the Chinese Communist Party” but rather someone who “came across as a supporter of the pre-1949 Chinese government,” before the communist takeover.
‘Troubling’ Decision
The headquarters had expressed skepticism about the allegations from the beginning.In a call with the Albany office, the headquarters indicated they “haven’t verified the alleged activity is occurring through other collection platforms,” and believe it could be part of the Chinese disinformation campaign toward the election,” according to a Sept. 25 internal email.
Concerns about disagreeing with Wray’s testimony appeared in at least two emails after the FBI re-interview.
“Based on the conflict of this information to that of the wider USIC (United States Intelligence Community), the fact that it contradicts Director Wray’s testimony to Congress, and the importance to the current administration, I think we should be ready to back up the IIR with a minimum of the following information and treat it like it will be going in front of the President,” one email issued from the Albany office read, going on to outline a list of questions regarding the source.
The FBI contact with the source replied within the next half-hour.
The FBI officials decided “there’s nothing new to report regarding the threat to the election.”
“Again, the reporting will contradict Director Wray’s testimony,” one Sept. 30 email read.
At least one FBI Albany intelligence analyst made clear they didn’t agree with the decision and questioned why “everyday operational and administrative” issues would need headquarters review.
“Most concerning to me, is stating the reporting would contradict with Director Wray’s testimony,” the analyst wrote. “I found this troubling because it implied to me that one of the reasons we aren’t putting this out is for a political reason, which goes directly against our organization’s mission to remain apolitical and simply state what we know. Likewise, at the field operational level, I do not feel it is our job to assess whether or not our intelligence aligns with the Director.”
The analyst contended that the FBI shouldn’t put out anything “reckless,” while knowing it to be false or will cause undue harm, but stressed that the agency makes up only “an incredibly small fraction of the intelligence community” and are “not in a sole position to determine a reporting’s validity.”
While it’s “entirely possible” that the subsource didn’t get the information from a Chinese official, “it’s also entirely possible that he did—(as just like in our own government),” the analyst noted, suggesting that they draft an updated report and let the headquarters decide what to do with it.
“I think it gets dangerous if we cite potential political implications as reasons for not putting out our information,” the email stated.
An intelligence analyst from the FBI Chicago division later consulted Albany for citing the intelligence report.
On Oct. 8, 2020, an official from the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force told the Albany office they still considered the information “not authoritative” and had not approved its reissuance.
Yates told Grassley that except for a request for information to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, they found no indication that the task force “aggressively investigated the reported information, despite corroborating intergovernmental reporting and logical investigative leads.”
While the recall notice ordered the memo’s destruction, Yates said that the related communications appear to have been preserved. He said the agency looks forward to continuing engagement with Grassley on the issue.
When asked if the agency plans to take any further action over the emails, an FBI official said the agency does not comment on personnel or disciplinary decisions.
“As we always do, the FBI is quickly working to right the wrongs of the past while rebuilding public confidence. The public deserves an FBI that is totally focused on defending the homeland and upholding the Constitution with integrity and that’s exactly what they’ll get,” the official told The Epoch Times.
“As part of his mission to restore public trust in the FBI, Director [Kash] Patel promised the Bureau would work with Congressional leaders and representatives to give the American people the full truth about investigations, including around 2020—and that’s exactly what we’re doing.”
On the morning of July 2, Trump reposted an article on the FBI email without commenting.
Grassley said the records “smack of political decision-making and prove the Wray-led FBI to be a deeply broken institution.”
“Ahead of a high-stakes election happening amid an unprecedented global pandemic, the FBI turned its back on its national security mission,” he said in a statement. “One way or the other, intelligence must be fully investigated to determine whether it’s true, or if it’s just smoke and mirrors.”
He thanked Patel, the FBI leader since February, for his willingness to work together to “establish renewed transparency.”
“Now’s the time to rebuild the FBI’s trust.”
.
