A significant revelation emerged in the ongoing investigation of Russian interference allegations during the 2016 presidential election.
According to Just the News, newly declassified documents show former National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers informed FBI agents that a Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post story about President Trump's alleged request to push back against the FBI collusion probe was "wrong."
Rogers' statement directly contradicted the Post's May 2017 article, which claimed Trump had urged him to publicly deny evidence of collusion during the 2016 election. The revelation comes from Rogers' June 2017 interview with FBI agents and special counsel Robert Mueller's team, where he provided a detailed account of his interactions with Trump.
Rogers explained to investigators that Trump had only inquired about the existence of signals intelligence evidence, not about pushing back against the investigation itself. He supported his statement with a memo he and his deputy had written immediately after their conversation with Trump.
The former NSA chief's testimony carries particular weight because he documented the conversation in real-time, anticipating public scrutiny. Both Rogers and his deputy, Richard Ledgett, signed the contemporaneous memo to ensure accuracy. During the March 2017 phone call with Trump, Rogers acknowledged the president's frustration with the ongoing investigation but maintained his position on Russian involvement in the election interference.
The Washington Post story in question was part of a collection that earned the newspaper a 2018 Pulitzer Prize, shared with The New York Times, for coverage of Russian interference in the 2016 election.
President Trump has filed a defamation lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize Board for defending these awards. A Florida circuit court recently denied the Board's motion to delay the lawsuit on presidential immunity grounds.
The Pulitzer Board has maintained its position, claiming two independent reviews supported the award-winning articles. However, Rogers' declassified testimony presents a direct challenge to their stance.
Judge Robert L. Pegg's March 10 ruling allows Trump's lawsuit to proceed, rejecting arguments that the case should be paused until after his presidential term. The decision marks a significant development in Trump's effort to challenge the legitimacy of the Pulitzer awards.
Trump's lawyer Quincy Bird described the ruling as an "unequivocal victory" in their pursuit of justice against the Pulitzer Prize board members. The case continues to move forward, with both sides preparing for further legal proceedings. The Board's spokesperson expressed concern about the ruling's implications, stating their commitment to defending journalism while evaluating their next steps in the legal battle.
The newly declassified documents reveal that Rogers' March 2017 conversation with Trump focused primarily on the president's frustration with Russian interference claims and their impact on U.S.-Russia relations. Rogers clarified the nature of this discussion to investigators, stating:
You want me to be truthful, right?' President Trump never suggested otherwise, but said he wanted to make sure there was no doubt about his involvement.
Rogers' interview notes further detail Trump's position:
ADM Rogers closed by stating he believes the President truly believes the government will never really know who is responsible for the hacking incidents during the 2016 Presidential election and that he himself has done nothing wrong.
Former NSA Director Mike Rogers' declassified testimony challenges the accuracy of a Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post article about President Trump's alleged attempt to interfere with the FBI's Russia investigation. His detailed account, supported by contemporaneous documentation, directly contradicts the Post's narrative that Trump urged him to publicly deny evidence of election interference collusion. The case continues in Florida courts, where Trump's defamation lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize Board proceeds, potentially affecting the credibility of major media coverage of the Russian interference investigation.
