This is a carefully researched and measured assessment of this curious relationship. I think it ends up at the most prudent conclusion responsible journalism will allow at this point, at least until we have additional information that could come our way in the future to change it. Good work, Michael, and looking forward to the next chapter.
Thanks, Bill. I'm looking forward to re-evaluating the 2016 -2020 period, having now gone through all this backstory. I'm not sure it will change my previous sense of it, but it feels a bit like having 'fresh eyes' for the Steele Dossier, Mueller report, etc.
Excellent Michael, extremely detailed and great explanations. That said, the “useful idiot” with the golden ego sounds about right, because regardless, the Russian’s couldn’t have invented a chaos agent more effective than Trump!
Bottom line, he’s easily manipulated, and suffers from a severe case of The Dunning Kruger Effect.
Not to mention, Trump’s PDB is delivered as a pop-up book, and he exhibits the signs of an individual who has the IQ of someone who thinks because his uncle was a professor at MIT, that it translates to him having a “good” brain; making him very smart.
Furthermore, it is also become apparent that he won’t criticize or condemn Putin in the same way he humiliates other European leaders. Additionally, he still refuses to impose additional sanctions on Russia in order to stop its aggression in Ukraine; helping Russia prolong the war. This actually explains a lot about his positions and tendencies to support Putin, regardless of whether Putin is right or wrong. and that in itself should be worrying to anyone who values democracy and the western rule of law.
Either way: useful idiot, paid asset, dictator for a day wannabe, or a just sad, sadistic clown; he has the classic signs of a delusional, narcissistic sociopath, and that makes him extremely dangerous to the National Interests of the United States of America: IMHO…:)
I fully agree with your analysis. In the recent discussions I have supported your professional approach that to pursue formal recruitment is risky, and not necessary. Especially in case of a narcissistic candidate, like Krasnov.
Fair questions —If Trump were a witting KGB agent, we would look for corroborated defector testimony from someone really in a position to know; Once you get past that, it's patterns and most of those patterns would be the same wether recruited or just maniopulated: consistent alignment with Russian strategic interests, financial entanglements with known cutouts or intermediaries, unusual deference to Russian narratives.
But you're right to ask: Would it matter? The real issue is less about whether Trump was formally recruited and more about whether his behavior has served foreign intelligence interests — wittingly or unwittingly. . That broader lens may be more useful than debating a binary label like “agent.”
Well, after a two-hour phone conversation with Trump a couple of days ago, "former" KGB counterintelligence Vladimir Putin seems to be bombing Kyiv with impunity, now.
Yes, and Trump is angry at him. Imagine that! ;-) I think Trump being angry at Putin now is mostly just an indication of Trump's frustration at not being able to flex his "art of the deal" status since he can't seem to make a deal for Ukraine happen.
I wonder at that two hour conversation between the two. What did Putin learn from Trump? How is Putin perhaps manipulating Trump? Is Trump's anger at Putin sincere and something Putin manipulates, or is the anger actually theater in a play toward a shared goal? Trump now claims Putin can't win all of Ukraine. That carries an odd ring. Especially with Gabbard as his top intel resource, and with Rubio firing what seems to be all the experts from the NSC. Something feels very very off. (I'm just a regular citizen out of my league here and learning from all of you.)
The adage that “you can’t fix stupid” absolutely holds with Trump. Adding the accelerant of a textbook case of Dunning-Kruger makes him the perfect patsy for the Russians to work with perfectly authentic deniability.
By not being "recruited" but instead "influential" Trump flew under red flag radars until it was too late. And even now it doesn't draw clear enough lines to accuse him of being a traitor or to have convinced Americans during the Mueller report of his KGB associations. Russians, Putin in particular, are very crafty at leaving no paper trails.
This seems very clear. I look forward to a broader picture of the inner circle's connections, Giuliany, Flynn and others and how that all worked together and could have been played by the FSB as a whole network operation, and the second part with Thiel, Vance, Musk and the tech group. How do these all come together to produce Trump 2.0?
I’ve read all of Ungers books, Olear’s as well, along with doing research of my own, which parallels with what you’ve written here.
The STB obviously shared their files on Trump with the KGB, while Trumps stay in the Lenin suite (The National)next door to KGB headquarters isn’t surprising. My search for other American recruits, who were targeted has been interesting, Robert Maxwell and Epstein come to mind, especially since Semion Mogilivech received an Israel passport. Any thoughts come to mind Micheal?
Trump certainly is the perfect stunod stooge, easily swayed by flattery and eastern block women…
It tracks very well. While the U.S. was underestimating post Soviet manipulations, Trump easily flew under any red flag radars by not being outright recruited. And has done significant damage to the U.S. bennifitting Putin. Yuri Bezmenov warned the West during the 1980s of this very strategy. Pit two political candidates against eachother who will cause division. Tank the economy. And even further, Putin a militant atheist who fakes his Orthodox religion makes fun of our gullible and naive evangelical Christians who were a thorn in the KGBs side during Soviet times. He's successfully disarmed any type of Christian resistance including Russian Orthodox resistance.
The big question now is what do Don's actions as President say about whether or not he was recruited. I test this by assuming the Steele Dossier is in place and asking if Don's actions are consistent. Time and again, they look as if they are. Great to have a Sellers Assessment.
We are on the doorstep of that one. The Steele dossier was largely proven to be accurate but the focus on the pee tape aspect kind of obscured the rest. Taking a good hard look at that and the mueller report now, with the whole 1977-2016 evidence in mind.
Thanks. It happens that I know Don and he's extremely confused about even simple things. He also struggles to speak English: he speaks in syntax-free sentence shards that cannot be connected in any logical way.
Trump (Krasnov) has followed his Soviet friends examples and actively turned our nation’s capital city into his own version of “Gotham City”. I wonder how Putin will play Trumps recent changes of opinion on how he has been accusing him of not playing along with his own attempt to be recognized as a “Peacemaker “?
Thanks for this masterful analysis. What is most concerning to me is that this dynamic seems to be part of what Anne Applebaum described in Autocracy, Inc.: the meshing of government, business and crime. She describes this dynamic as spreading among nonwestern nations, including developing nations, so that traditional western democratic means of aid and support no longer attract those governments to behave according to the rule of international law. Instead they benefit from their combination of business, criminal organizations, and government. I fear that this is the direction our administration and its party are steering this nation as well. It seems that our president may be OK with that, given his history, which you have so carefully presented.
I'd like to live long enough to know the truth about him. But it may take decades for that. It might take Russia turning back to democracy to get the truth out.
While reading your article and accompanying comments, two photos came to mind: compare an official photo of Putin with Trump's mug shot -- their stern affect, tight lips, and cold, menacing stares are eerily similar. Am now wondering about the macho handshake and other gestures.
I am not a psychologist but it seems by unconsciously mimicking Putin, Trump not only accepts all the flattery (and other benefits) Putin's crew bestows on him, but also doubles the ego reward by flattering himself that he is is just as much a strongman as Putin. Mimicry as a sign of overidentification with Putin would complement your observations of Trump parroting Russian points of view.
It's my understanding that the old KGB wasn't just what we now call the FSB, it was comprised of two basic parts -- The First Chief Directorate (foreign; today's SVR) and the Second Chief Directorate (domestic and overall counterintelligence; today's FSB). In 1959, Department D was set up in the former to wage Sun Tzu-like deception operations against the U.S. and its NATO allies, and the latter's General Oleg Gribanov, not to be outdone, set up his own deception-based unit, Department 14 and, as soon as recent traitor Oleg Penkovsky was "cornered like a bear in its den" in such a way that wouldn't finger his betrayer, proceeded to send Aleksei Kulak and Dmitry Polyakov to the FBI's NYC field office and, half-a-year later, Yuri Nosenko to the CIA in Geneva to discredit what true defector Anatoliy Golitsyn was telling Angleton about KGB penetrations of the CIA (can you say Angleton's confidant Bruce Solie and Leonard V. McCoy, et al.?), the FBI, and the intelligence services of our NATO allies -- especially France.
This is a carefully researched and measured assessment of this curious relationship. I think it ends up at the most prudent conclusion responsible journalism will allow at this point, at least until we have additional information that could come our way in the future to change it. Good work, Michael, and looking forward to the next chapter.
Thanks, Bill. I'm looking forward to re-evaluating the 2016 -2020 period, having now gone through all this backstory. I'm not sure it will change my previous sense of it, but it feels a bit like having 'fresh eyes' for the Steele Dossier, Mueller report, etc.
Excellent Michael, extremely detailed and great explanations. That said, the “useful idiot” with the golden ego sounds about right, because regardless, the Russian’s couldn’t have invented a chaos agent more effective than Trump!
Bottom line, he’s easily manipulated, and suffers from a severe case of The Dunning Kruger Effect.
Not to mention, Trump’s PDB is delivered as a pop-up book, and he exhibits the signs of an individual who has the IQ of someone who thinks because his uncle was a professor at MIT, that it translates to him having a “good” brain; making him very smart.
Furthermore, it is also become apparent that he won’t criticize or condemn Putin in the same way he humiliates other European leaders. Additionally, he still refuses to impose additional sanctions on Russia in order to stop its aggression in Ukraine; helping Russia prolong the war. This actually explains a lot about his positions and tendencies to support Putin, regardless of whether Putin is right or wrong. and that in itself should be worrying to anyone who values democracy and the western rule of law.
Either way: useful idiot, paid asset, dictator for a day wannabe, or a just sad, sadistic clown; he has the classic signs of a delusional, narcissistic sociopath, and that makes him extremely dangerous to the National Interests of the United States of America: IMHO…:)
Truer words Robert!!
Michael,
I fully agree with your analysis. In the recent discussions I have supported your professional approach that to pursue formal recruitment is risky, and not necessary. Especially in case of a narcissistic candidate, like Krasnov.
If Trump were a witting KGB agent, what kind of "proof" would you expect to find?
And what difference does it make, anyway?
Fair questions —If Trump were a witting KGB agent, we would look for corroborated defector testimony from someone really in a position to know; Once you get past that, it's patterns and most of those patterns would be the same wether recruited or just maniopulated: consistent alignment with Russian strategic interests, financial entanglements with known cutouts or intermediaries, unusual deference to Russian narratives.
But you're right to ask: Would it matter? The real issue is less about whether Trump was formally recruited and more about whether his behavior has served foreign intelligence interests — wittingly or unwittingly. . That broader lens may be more useful than debating a binary label like “agent.”
Well, after a two-hour phone conversation with Trump a couple of days ago, "former" KGB counterintelligence Vladimir Putin seems to be bombing Kyiv with impunity, now.
Yes, and Trump is angry at him. Imagine that! ;-) I think Trump being angry at Putin now is mostly just an indication of Trump's frustration at not being able to flex his "art of the deal" status since he can't seem to make a deal for Ukraine happen.
I wonder at that two hour conversation between the two. What did Putin learn from Trump? How is Putin perhaps manipulating Trump? Is Trump's anger at Putin sincere and something Putin manipulates, or is the anger actually theater in a play toward a shared goal? Trump now claims Putin can't win all of Ukraine. That carries an odd ring. Especially with Gabbard as his top intel resource, and with Rubio firing what seems to be all the experts from the NSC. Something feels very very off. (I'm just a regular citizen out of my league here and learning from all of you.)
Maybe he'll eventually realize he's being played.
Or it’s just ‘performative outrage.’ Red meat for his base.
The adage that “you can’t fix stupid” absolutely holds with Trump. Adding the accelerant of a textbook case of Dunning-Kruger makes him the perfect patsy for the Russians to work with perfectly authentic deniability.
By not being "recruited" but instead "influential" Trump flew under red flag radars until it was too late. And even now it doesn't draw clear enough lines to accuse him of being a traitor or to have convinced Americans during the Mueller report of his KGB associations. Russians, Putin in particular, are very crafty at leaving no paper trails.
This seems very clear. I look forward to a broader picture of the inner circle's connections, Giuliany, Flynn and others and how that all worked together and could have been played by the FSB as a whole network operation, and the second part with Thiel, Vance, Musk and the tech group. How do these all come together to produce Trump 2.0?
I’ve read all of Ungers books, Olear’s as well, along with doing research of my own, which parallels with what you’ve written here.
The STB obviously shared their files on Trump with the KGB, while Trumps stay in the Lenin suite (The National)next door to KGB headquarters isn’t surprising. My search for other American recruits, who were targeted has been interesting, Robert Maxwell and Epstein come to mind, especially since Semion Mogilivech received an Israel passport. Any thoughts come to mind Micheal?
Trump certainly is the perfect stunod stooge, easily swayed by flattery and eastern block women…
So far, this seems to explain the "dicey" relationship with Putin. Don't you think?
I think it all tracks pretty well. It will be interesting to take another look at 2016-2024 with 1977-2016 having been thoroughly examined.
It tracks very well. While the U.S. was underestimating post Soviet manipulations, Trump easily flew under any red flag radars by not being outright recruited. And has done significant damage to the U.S. bennifitting Putin. Yuri Bezmenov warned the West during the 1980s of this very strategy. Pit two political candidates against eachother who will cause division. Tank the economy. And even further, Putin a militant atheist who fakes his Orthodox religion makes fun of our gullible and naive evangelical Christians who were a thorn in the KGBs side during Soviet times. He's successfully disarmed any type of Christian resistance including Russian Orthodox resistance.
it would be interesting to hear your take on Trump's wives role as possible handlers…
I guess this analysis and conclusion could also apply to Tulsi Gabbert. Would you agree? And where exactly does Melania fit into Russian strategy?
I am not sure about Tulsi but would agree it would be good to try and analyze a bit.
Please do!!
The big question now is what do Don's actions as President say about whether or not he was recruited. I test this by assuming the Steele Dossier is in place and asking if Don's actions are consistent. Time and again, they look as if they are. Great to have a Sellers Assessment.
We are on the doorstep of that one. The Steele dossier was largely proven to be accurate but the focus on the pee tape aspect kind of obscured the rest. Taking a good hard look at that and the mueller report now, with the whole 1977-2016 evidence in mind.
Here's what I did with your analysis in my Publius Audax blog:
https://www.publiusaudax.com/post/dossier-don-is-don
We can't trust Don to be consistent in anything. Look at the unfolding chaotic process on tariffs. Would you characterise it as consistence?
Thanks. It happens that I know Don and he's extremely confused about even simple things. He also struggles to speak English: he speaks in syntax-free sentence shards that cannot be connected in any logical way.
Trump (Krasnov) has followed his Soviet friends examples and actively turned our nation’s capital city into his own version of “Gotham City”. I wonder how Putin will play Trumps recent changes of opinion on how he has been accusing him of not playing along with his own attempt to be recognized as a “Peacemaker “?
Thanks for this masterful analysis. What is most concerning to me is that this dynamic seems to be part of what Anne Applebaum described in Autocracy, Inc.: the meshing of government, business and crime. She describes this dynamic as spreading among nonwestern nations, including developing nations, so that traditional western democratic means of aid and support no longer attract those governments to behave according to the rule of international law. Instead they benefit from their combination of business, criminal organizations, and government. I fear that this is the direction our administration and its party are steering this nation as well. It seems that our president may be OK with that, given his history, which you have so carefully presented.
I'd like to live long enough to know the truth about him. But it may take decades for that. It might take Russia turning back to democracy to get the truth out.
While reading your article and accompanying comments, two photos came to mind: compare an official photo of Putin with Trump's mug shot -- their stern affect, tight lips, and cold, menacing stares are eerily similar. Am now wondering about the macho handshake and other gestures.
I am not a psychologist but it seems by unconsciously mimicking Putin, Trump not only accepts all the flattery (and other benefits) Putin's crew bestows on him, but also doubles the ego reward by flattering himself that he is is just as much a strongman as Putin. Mimicry as a sign of overidentification with Putin would complement your observations of Trump parroting Russian points of view.
Handshake Putin-Trump 5 yr ago
Mimicry: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9905714/
Handshake Putin-Trump 5 yr ago
https://youtu.be/E_NDqQ4T9D0?feature=shared
It's my understanding that the old KGB wasn't just what we now call the FSB, it was comprised of two basic parts -- The First Chief Directorate (foreign; today's SVR) and the Second Chief Directorate (domestic and overall counterintelligence; today's FSB). In 1959, Department D was set up in the former to wage Sun Tzu-like deception operations against the U.S. and its NATO allies, and the latter's General Oleg Gribanov, not to be outdone, set up his own deception-based unit, Department 14 and, as soon as recent traitor Oleg Penkovsky was "cornered like a bear in its den" in such a way that wouldn't finger his betrayer, proceeded to send Aleksei Kulak and Dmitry Polyakov to the FBI's NYC field office and, half-a-year later, Yuri Nosenko to the CIA in Geneva to discredit what true defector Anatoliy Golitsyn was telling Angleton about KGB penetrations of the CIA (can you say Angleton's confidant Bruce Solie and Leonard V. McCoy, et al.?), the FBI, and the intelligence services of our NATO allies -- especially France.
Isn't this Part 5, not Part 4??