Special advisers appointed during the Trump administration were “exploited” by President Donald Trump’s technology chief for access to computer information at the White House.
John Duram “Tech Executive-1”, appointed by Attorney General William Barr to investigate the origins of the FBI investigation in 2020, is not mentioned in the application but was first featured in the New York Times. S used data.
He said the announcement of Trump and his allies was a sign that Trump was under surveillance during his tenure. Representative Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, told Fox News on Sunday: “They are spying on the President of the United States. “And it goes right to the Clinton campaign.” In a statement Monday, Trump said the suspect was “the biggest story of our time.”
There is no record of any documents from the President’s Office or EOP or any other entity that have been in contact with the contents of the document. He left.
Rob Graham, a cybersecurity expert, told NBC News that what he was looking at was a computer search for domain names and addresses.
Graham’s translates the DNS into a specific IP address and to a different server group. He said that monitoring such traffic is not the content of a human screen or message, but that a computer or server is trying to reach someone else.
In September, the Duram Office filed a lawsuit against Michael Susman, a lawyer accused of lying about his relationship with Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.
During a press conference on Friday, prosecutors reported that Tech Executive-1 provided information on the connection between computer servers at the EOP, two Trump-owned buildings in New York and an unrelated medical company in Michigan with Russian-made mobile phones near the White House. He provided information. Data collected from 2014, during the Obama administration, until February 2017.
According to prosecutors, Susman provided the information to an unnamed federal agency during a 20-day meeting of the Trump administration on February 9, 2017, and said the information showed that “Trump and / or his allies were using Russian-considered weapons.” He made wireless phones in the White House and elsewhere.
“The Special Adviser Office has stated that it has no support for these allegations,” the statement said.
According to prosecutors, Susman told the New York Times CIA that he was working for a client when he submitted the report, but did not inform the agency when he was actually represented by “Tech Executive-1”.
Lawyers say Susman could face further legal risks if he does not disclose his relationship with Joseph.
“Contrary to recent allegations, Mr. Joffé is a political Internet security expert who has worked for the US government for decades and has never worked in a political party,” said a spokesman. Receiving DNS information from a private client when providing DNS services to the Presidential Executive (EOP).
“The information allows us to identify and analyze any security breaches or threats,” said a spokesman for Joseph.
“Because of the EOP and the abduction [Democratic National Committee] A.D. In 2015 and 2016, there were serious and legitimate national security threats to Russia’s attempts to infiltrate the 2016 elections, respectively, “the spokesman said. From the Trump campaign and the EOP. Well-known cybercriminals were deeply concerned about the breach of the DNA when it came to identifying DNS requests from Russians who were close to it, and reported their findings to the CIA.
Drum’s office first charged Susman in September. As reported by NBC News, Susman’s case was discussed during the 2016 Clinton campaign on cyber security issues, and a partner in the company served as a general adviser to the campaign. As a prosecutor, on September 19, 2016, Sussman and then-FBI Director General James Baker Susman spoke to Baker about his suspicions about the Trump campaign and Russia. Prosecutors say Susman “lied” that he was not working for any client to report the allegations.
Suspicions involving Internet traffic with Russia’s Alpha-Bank were later ruled baseless.
At the time of the indictment, Susman’s lawyers issued the following statement: … This case represents the opposite of what should be stopped by the Department of Justice.
“Essentially, the Special Adviser is making false allegations based on a statement that was not reported to a witness five years ago.
Durham’s investigation continues and in addition to Susman, another case has been filed. Last year, a Russian analyst, the source of the steel dossier, lied to the FBI.
Duram was ousted last year during the Clinton administration as a Connecticut lawyer and U.S. attorney, and later as a U.S. attorney during the Trump administration.
Friday’s court case is part of a series of inquiries into whether Latham and Watkins are willing to serve as counsel for Susman because it represents other interested parties in the case.