In "Compromised," Peter Strzok, a former FBI counterintelligence agent, provides an insider's account of the FBI's investigations into Hillary Clinton's emails and Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election. The book offers a behind-the-scenes look at these high-profile cases and aims to set the record straight about what really happened, countering the narratives pushed by partisan media and the White House.
Strzok, who played a key role in both investigations, takes readers through the complex web of events, decisions, and discoveries that shaped these probes. He details the FBI's methodical approach, the challenges they faced, and the mounting evidence of Russian interference and connections to the Trump campaign.
The author also shares his personal experiences and perspectives, including the controversy surrounding his text messages and his eventual removal from the investigations. Through his account, Strzok seeks to defend the integrity of the FBI and its work, while sounding an alarm about the threats to American democracy posed by foreign interference and domestic attempts to undermine law enforcement institutions.
Russia's Mastery of Espionage and Intelligence
The book begins by highlighting Russia's exceptional skills in espionage and intelligence operations. Strzok recounts his experience with Operation Ghost Stories, an FBI investigation into Russian "illegals" - deep-cover intelligence agents living seemingly normal lives in the United States.
One such couple, known as Don Heathfield and Ann Foley, had been living in Massachusetts for years. They appeared to be ordinary Canadian immigrants, with Don attending Harvard and the couple raising two sons. In reality, they were Andrey Bezrukov and Elena Vavilova, Russian intelligence agents tasked with gathering information and identifying potential assets for Russia.
This operation opened Strzok's eyes to the sophistication of Russian intelligence efforts. He explains that intelligence, in this context, refers to the secret operations a nation conducts to gain strategic advantages over others. Counterintelligence, then, is the effort to thwart such operations by adversaries.
Russia excels particularly in "active measures," a form of counterintelligence that involves using false or distorted information to influence political or social outcomes in other countries. This tactic would later play a significant role in the 2016 US election.
Another key Russian intelligence tactic is the use of kompromat - compromising material collected on individuals that can be used for blackmail or coercion. This information can be anything from evidence of sexual indiscretions to financial improprieties. Once Russia obtains kompromat on someone, that person becomes vulnerable to manipulation and is considered "compromised" in intelligence parlance.
Strzok emphasizes that understanding these Russian tactics is crucial for grasping the events surrounding the 2016 election and its aftermath. The sophistication of Russia's intelligence operations would prove to be a formidable challenge for the FBI and other US intelligence agencies.
The Clinton Email Investigation: Midyear Exam
The narrative then shifts to the origins of the FBI's investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State. This investigation, code-named Midyear Exam, began in July 2015 following the discovery of potentially classified information in some of Clinton's emails.
The investigation stemmed from the aftermath of the 2012 attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya. As part of a congressional inquiry into the incident, the State Department was required to release Clinton's emails. During this process, it was discovered that Clinton had been using a private email account and server for official business, rather than the State Department's official system.
The FBI's task was to determine whether Clinton's use of a private server had led to the mishandling of classified information. The investigation had to answer several key questions:
- Where were all of Clinton's emails stored?
- Who had put classified information into the emails, and why?
- Had any unauthorized parties gained access to the classified information?
Strzok details the painstaking process of locating all the relevant servers and determining which emails contained classified information. This often required input from multiple government agencies to assess the classification level of individual emails.
The investigation also involved conducting interviews with various parties around the world to understand the intentions behind the inclusion of classified information in emails. Finally, the FBI had to determine if any classified information had been accessed by unauthorized individuals.
As the investigation progressed, two key points became clear:
- There had indeed been mishandling of classified information.
- There didn't appear to be evidence of behavior that the Department of Justice had previously prosecuted under criminal law.
Strzok explains that while the FBI has a high bar for opening mishandling cases, the Department of Justice has an even higher bar for prosecuting them. Typically, the DOJ is unlikely to prosecute cases where a person hasn't knowingly or maliciously disclosed classified information.
In Clinton's case, while there was evidence of "extreme carelessness" in her use of a private email server, the investigation didn't uncover any criminal intent. This distinction would prove crucial in the FBI's ultimate recommendation.
The investigation faced a significant delay when Clinton's attorneys revealed the existence of two laptops used to sort Clinton's emails. The FBI had to obtain and review these laptops, a process that took several months and threatened to overlap with the Democratic National Convention in July 2016.
Once the laptops were finally analyzed and Clinton herself was interviewed, the FBI concluded its investigation. Despite the mishandling of classified information, the lack of criminal intent led the FBI to recommend that the Department of Justice not press charges against Clinton.
Strzok emphasizes that this decision was based on the evidence and precedent, not on any political considerations. However, the controversy surrounding the investigation and its conclusion would continue to play a significant role in the 2016 election and beyond.
Russian Interference in the 2016 Election
As the Midyear Exam investigation was wrapping up, a new threat was emerging: Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election. Strzok details how the Russians employed sophisticated cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns to influence the election outcome and sow discord among the American public.
The Russian operation began with a series of cyberattacks targeting the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and key figures in the Clinton campaign. In April 2016, a staffer at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee received what appeared to be a security notification from Google, requesting a password reset. In reality, this was a phishing attempt by Russian intelligence operatives.
Similar tactics were used to gain access to the email account of John Podesta, Clinton's campaign co-chair. These attacks resulted in the theft of thousands of emails and documents.
Simultaneously, the Russians launched a social media disinformation campaign. They created fake accounts and pages, such as the Twitter account @Ten_GOP, which claimed to represent Tennessee Republicans. These accounts spread misinformation about various political topics, including false claims about crowd sizes at Trump rallies and conspiracy theories about President Obama.
The stolen emails and documents were strategically released through platforms like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks. The timing of these releases was carefully orchestrated to maximize their impact on the election.
Strzok emphasizes that the Russian interference operation had multiple objectives:
- To sway the US presidential election away from Hillary Clinton
- To sow political divisions within the United States, weakening its power on the global stage
- To potentially compromise their primary target, Donald Trump
The scale and sophistication of the Russian operation became increasingly clear as the FBI's investigation progressed. It represented a significant escalation in Russia's efforts to interfere with American democracy, going far beyond traditional espionage or intelligence gathering.
The Birth of Crossfire Hurricane
In late July 2016, the FBI launched a new investigation codenamed Crossfire Hurricane. This probe was sparked by intelligence regarding George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign.
The Australian government had informed the FBI about a conversation between Papadopoulos and Alexander Downer, the Australian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom. During this conversation, Papadopoulos had mentioned that the Russians possessed damaging information about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. More alarmingly, he suggested that the Russian government had offered to assist the Trump campaign by coordinating the release of this material.
This information raised serious concerns about potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The FBI needed to determine the source of Papadopoulos's information and whether other members of the Trump campaign were involved in or aware of these Russian overtures.
To investigate these matters, the FBI compiled a matrix of individuals connected to the Trump campaign who had suspicious ties to Russia. This list included:
- George Papadopoulos
- Paul Manafort, Trump's campaign manager
- Carter Page, a member of Trump's foreign policy team
- Michael Flynn, Trump's senior advisor on national security matters
Each of these individuals had demonstrated connections to Russia that warranted further investigation. For instance, during this period, Paul Manafort was meeting with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Ukrainian linked to Russian intelligence services, to share polling data that could be valuable for targeting key voting blocs.
Strzok emphasizes that Crossfire Hurricane began as a narrow investigation into Papadopoulos but quickly revealed a broader web of connections between Russia and the Trump campaign. The FBI faced the challenging task of unraveling these connections while maintaining the confidentiality of the investigation to avoid influencing the ongoing election.
The author stresses that the decision to open Crossfire Hurricane was not taken lightly. It was based on credible intelligence and followed standard FBI procedures for initiating counterintelligence investigations. However, the sensitive nature of investigating individuals connected to a presidential campaign required extreme caution and discretion.
The Reopening of the Clinton Email Investigation
Just as the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was gaining momentum, the FBI was forced to revisit the Clinton email case. In October 2016, less than a month before the election, investigators discovered a new cache of emails on a laptop belonging to former congressman Anthony Weiner, the husband of Clinton's aide Huma Abedin.
This discovery presented a dilemma for the FBI. While it seemed unlikely that these emails would contain significant new information, the agency had an obligation to review them thoroughly. The timing, however, was problematic. Reopening the investigation so close to the election could potentially influence the outcome.
FBI Director James Comey faced a difficult decision: whether to inform Congress about the reopened investigation. Strzok details the intense discussions within the FBI about how to proceed. On one hand, notifying Congress would likely become public and could harm Clinton's campaign. On the other hand, not disclosing the information risked accusations of a cover-up if it came to light after the election.
Ultimately, Comey decided to inform Congress, a decision that was highly controversial and widely criticized. Strzok explains the reasoning behind this choice, emphasizing that it was made to maintain the FBI's integrity and transparency, not out of any political motivation.
The FBI worked tirelessly to review the new emails before Election Day. Contrary to initial expectations that the review would take months, the team managed to complete it in just over a week. They concluded that the emails contained no new relevant information, and Comey announced this finding just two days before the election.
Strzok reflects on the impact of these events on the election outcome. While it's impossible to determine definitively, many analysts believe that the reopening of the investigation and the subsequent media coverage may have influenced some voters' decisions.
This episode highlights the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies when investigations intersect with political events. Strzok argues that throughout this process, the FBI strived to maintain its independence and adhere to its principles, despite the intense pressure and scrutiny from all sides.
The Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA)
Following the 2016 election, the Obama administration ordered a comprehensive analysis of Russia's interference in the electoral process. This task was assigned to the FBI, CIA, and NSA, resulting in what became known as the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA).
Strzok explains that the ICA was conducted by a small group of experts from these agencies to maintain the confidentiality of the sensitive information involved. The goal was to provide a definitive account of Russia's actions and their impact on the election.
The ICA reached several crucial conclusions:
- Russia had indeed interfered in the 2016 US presidential election.
- The interference was directed at the highest levels of the Russian government, including President Vladimir Putin.
- Russia's primary aim was to undermine public faith in the US democratic process and to help elect Donald Trump.
The assessment detailed various methods used by Russia, including cyberattacks, social media disinformation campaigns, and attempts to infiltrate election infrastructure. It also highlighted Russia's use of state-funded media, online trolls, and other assets to spread propaganda and manipulate public opinion.
Strzok emphasizes the significance of this unanimous conclusion by the intelligence community. It represented a clear and unambiguous statement about the reality and extent of Russian interference, backed by extensive evidence and analysis.
In response to the ICA's findings, the Obama administration imposed sanctions on Russia. However, the incoming Trump administration's reaction to these sanctions would soon raise new concerns.
Michael Flynn, Trump's newly appointed national security advisor, had a phone conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. In this call, Flynn asked Russia not to escalate the situation in response to Obama's sanctions. This request, made without the knowledge or authorization of the sitting administration, potentially violated the Logan Act, which prohibits private citizens from conducting unauthorized negotiations with foreign governments.
Strzok explains how Flynn's actions raised serious counterintelligence concerns. By making this secret request and then lying about it to FBI investigators, Flynn had made himself vulnerable to Russian leverage. This situation exemplified the concept of kompromat - compromising information that could be used for blackmail or coercion.
The author argues that this episode was just one of many that demonstrated the unusual and concerning relationship between members of the Trump team and Russia. It set the stage for further investigations into potential collusion and obstruction of justice.
The Steele Dossier and Its Impact
As the intelligence community prepared to brief the incoming President Trump on the ICA's findings, a new complication arose: the Steele dossier. Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, had compiled a series of reports containing allegations about Trump's connections to Russia.
Strzok details the FBI's struggle with how to handle this information. The Steele dossier contained a mix of unverified claims, some of which aligned with intelligence the FBI had independently gathered, while others seemed far-fetched or were later disproven.
The most sensational allegation in the dossier involved Trump supposedly engaging in compromising behavior at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Moscow. While this claim was unsubstantiated, its mere existence posed a counterintelligence concern. If true, it could provide Russia with powerful kompromat over the incoming president.
The FBI leadership debated whether to include information from the Steele dossier in their briefing to Trump. They ultimately decided to inform him about its existence and some of its contents, reasoning that it was better for Trump to hear about it from them than from other sources.
Strzok recounts FBI Director Comey's private briefing with Trump about these allegations. According to Comey's memos, Trump's reaction was surprisingly muted. He didn't express anger or denial but simply asked about the timing of the alleged incident and made comments suggesting it couldn't be true.
The author emphasizes that the significance of the Steele dossier wasn't in the salacious details, but in the broader pattern it suggested of Trump's potential vulnerability to Russian influence. Whether the specific allegations were true or not, Trump's denials could provide Russia with leverage if they possessed contradicting information.
This situation exemplified the complex counterintelligence challenges posed by Trump's election. The FBI had to navigate uncharted territory, balancing the need to investigate serious allegations while avoiding the appearance of political bias.
Strzok argues that the controversy surrounding the Steele dossier has often overshadowed the more substantial evidence of Russian interference and potential collusion. He maintains that while the dossier played a role in the investigations, it was far from the only or even the primary basis for the FBI's concerns.
The Flynn Investigation and Trump's Reaction
The investigation into Michael Flynn's communications with Russian Ambassador Kislyak took a dramatic turn when the media reported on their phone call. This put the Trump administration in a difficult position, as Vice President Mike Pence had publicly stated that Flynn's conversations with Kislyak did not involve discussions about sanctions.
Strzok describes how he and another agent were tasked with interviewing Flynn at the White House. During this interview, Flynn repeatedly lied about his conversations with Kislyak, despite the FBI having evidence to the contrary. Strzok notes the peculiarity of Flynn's demeanor - he showed no signs of nervousness or deception, despite clearly not telling the truth.
This raised several possibilities: Was Flynn in deep denial? Had he genuinely forgotten the content of his conversations? Or was he simply unaware of the gravity of his situation?
The situation escalated when Vice President Pence requested a briefing from the FBI, concerned that Flynn had lied to him. This led to Flynn's resignation just days later. He would eventually plead guilty to making false statements to the FBI.
However, the most alarming development came the day after Flynn's resignation. In a private conversation with FBI Director Comey, President Trump allegedly said, "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."
Strzok emphasizes the significance of this interaction. The president appeared to be pressuring the FBI director to drop an ongoing investigation into a senior administration official. This raised serious questions about potential obstruction of justice.
Comey, recognizing the gravity of the situation, began documenting his interactions with Trump in a series of classified memos. He shared these memos with a small group of senior FBI officials, including Strzok.
The author argues that Trump's attempt to interfere with the Flynn investigation marked a turning point. It suggested that the president was willing to obstruct justice to protect his associates, raising further questions about his motivations and his relationship with Russia.
This episode, according to Strzok, exemplified the unprecedented challenges faced by the FBI during this period. They were dealing not only with potential foreign interference but also with a president who seemed intent on impeding their investigations.
The Investigation into Trump
Following Trump's apparent attempt to obstruct the Flynn investigation, the FBI faced a crucial decision: whether to open a formal investigation into the president himself. Strzok recounts the intense debates within the Bureau about this unprecedented step.
For weeks, Strzok had argued against such an investigation, believing it unlikely that Trump was actively working as a Russian agent. However, Trump's behavior regarding the Russia probe, particularly his apparent obstruction in the Flynn case, began to change minds.
The situation reached a critical point when Trump abruptly fired FBI Director Comey. The manner of Comey's dismissal - learning about it from television news while giving a speech - shocked the FBI and raised serious concerns about the president's motives.
These concerns were further amplified when, the day after firing Comey, Trump met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Ambassador Kislyak in the Oval Office. During this meeting, Trump reportedly told the Russian officials that he had fired Comey, calling him "crazy" and a "real nut job." More alarmingly, he stated that he had faced "great pressure because of Russia" but that was now "taken off."
Strzok emphasizes the gravity of these statements. The president had essentially admitted to a foreign adversary that he had fired the FBI director to relieve pressure from the Russia investigation. This not only suggested obstruction of justice but also raised counterintelligence concerns about Trump's loyalties.
In light of these events, the FBI made the momentous decision to open a formal investigation into President Trump on May 16, 2017. Strzok stresses that this was not a decision taken lightly. It required careful consideration of the legal and constitutional implications of investigating a sitting president.
The investigation sought to answer two key questions:
- Was the president working on behalf of Russia, either knowingly or unknowingly?
- Had the president committed obstruction of justice in his attempts to impede the Russia investigation?
However, just two days after opening this investigation, the FBI learned that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had appointed Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to oversee the Russia investigation. This appointment effectively transferred control of the Trump investigation to Mueller's team.
Strzok argues that the decision to investigate Trump was based on a pattern of behavior that could not be ignored. The president's actions had raised legitimate concerns about national security and the rule of law. While controversial, the author maintains that opening this investigation was necessary to fulfill the FBI's duty to protect the country from both foreign and domestic threats.
The Mueller Investigation and Trump's Attacks
The appointment of Robert Mueller as Special Counsel marked a new phase in the Russia investigation. Strzok describes the enormous scope of Mueller's probe, which involved hundreds of witness interviews, thousands of subpoenas, and the collection and analysis of vast amounts of data.
Despite the extensive work being done, it wasn't long before President Trump began to attack Mueller and decry the investigation as a "witch hunt." Trump used his Twitter account to spread conspiracy theories, undermine public trust in the FBI, and attack individuals involved in the investigation.
Strzok himself became a target of these attacks when his text messages with FBI lawyer Lisa Page became public. These messages, sent on FBI-issued phones, contained personal opinions critical of Trump. Although the Justice Department's Inspector General found no evidence that these personal views had affected Strzok's work, they became fodder for accusations of bias within the FBI.
The author recounts how he agreed to leave the Mueller investigation to avoid any appearance of impropriety. However, once his texts became public, he found himself at the center of a political firestorm. Trump and his allies used Strzok's messages to fuel claims of a "deep state" conspiracy against the president.
Strzok argues that these attacks were part of a broader strategy to discredit the Russia investigation and undermine public faith in law enforcement institutions. He contends that by focusing on individuals like himself, Trump and his supporters sought to distract from the substantive findings of Russian interference and potential obstruction of justice.
The situation escalated when Trump accused Strzok of treason - a crime punishable by death. Strzok, who had spent his career serving in the U.S. Army and the FBI, found himself facing death threats and public vilification.
The author draws parallels between these tactics and those used by authoritarian regimes. He argues that attempts to intimidate law enforcement officials, discredit investigations, and sow doubt about democratic institutions are hallmarks of autocratic behavior.
Strzok maintains that despite the personal cost to himself and others, the investigations into Russian interference and potential obstruction were necessary and conducted with integrity. He argues that the attacks on the FBI and the Mueller investigation were designed to protect Trump from scrutiny and accountability.
The Threat to American Democracy
In the final sections of the book, Strzok reflects on the broader implications of the events he has described. He argues that the combination of Russian interference, the Trump administration's response to investigations, and the attacks on law enforcement institutions pose a significant threat to American democracy.
The author emphasizes several key points:
Russian Interference: The scale and sophistication of Russia's efforts to influence the 2016 election represent an ongoing threat. Strzok warns that without a robust response, such interference is likely to continue and potentially escalate in future elections.
Vulnerability to Foreign Influence: The willingness of some members of the Trump campaign to engage with Russian offers of assistance demonstrates a dangerous openness to foreign interference. This vulnerability extends to the highest levels of government when officials are compromised or susceptible to blackmail.
Attacks on Democratic Institutions: The persistent efforts to undermine the credibility of the FBI, the Department of Justice, and other institutions erode public trust in the foundations of American democracy. Strzok argues that this weakening of institutions serves the interests of both domestic authoritarians and foreign adversaries.
The Power of Disinformation: The ease with which conspiracy theories and false narratives spread through social media and partisan news outlets poses a significant challenge to maintaining an informed electorate.
The Importance of Counterintelligence: Strzok stresses the critical role of counterintelligence work in protecting national security. He argues that the politicization of these efforts hampers the ability of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to defend against foreign threats.
Strzok contends that addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach:
- Strengthening election security and improving defenses against foreign interference
- Enhancing transparency in government while protecting necessary classified information
- Promoting media literacy and critical thinking to combat disinformation
- Reaffirming the independence of law enforcement and intelligence agencies
- Holding accountable those who abuse their positions of power or collude with foreign entities
The author concludes by calling on Americans to remain vigilant in defense of democratic values and institutions. He argues that the threats he has observed are not partisan issues but fundamental challenges to the American system of government.
Strzok maintains that despite the controversies surrounding the investigations he was involved in, the work of the FBI and other agencies was crucial in uncovering and addressing serious threats to national security. He urges readers to look beyond partisan rhetoric and consider the factual evidence of foreign interference and potential obstruction of justice.
Conclusion
"Compromised" offers a detailed, firsthand account of some of the most consequential investigations in recent American history. Peter Strzok provides insight into the complex world of counterintelligence, the challenges of investigating political figures, and the unprecedented situation of examining potential foreign influence at the highest levels of government.
The book serves as both a defense of the FBI's work and a warning about the ongoing threats to American democracy. Strzok argues that the investigations into Russian interference and potential obstruction of justice were necessary and conducted with integrity, despite the political firestorm they ignited.
He challenges readers to look beyond partisan narratives and consider the broader implications of foreign interference in elections, the vulnerability of political figures to compromise, and the dangers of undermining democratic institutions.
Ultimately, "Compromised" is a call to action. Strzok urges Americans to remain engaged, informed, and committed to protecting the foundations of their democracy. He argues that the threats he observed during his time at the FBI are not confined to any single administration or election cycle but represent ongoing challenges that require vigilance and a renewed commitment to democratic values.
The book leaves readers with a sobering assessment of the state of American democracy and the work that lies ahead in securing it against both foreign and domestic threats. Strzok's insider perspective offers a unique and valuable contribution to the ongoing national conversation about the integrity of elections, the rule of law, and the future of American democracy.