Mike Rogers unable to provide evidence that Edward Snowden is under Russian influence
On January 19, 2014, Republican congressman and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Rogers went on Meet the Press and made the following statement: “Let me just say this, I believe there’s a reason he ended up in the hands, the loving arms, of an FSB agent in Moscow. I don’t think that’s a coincidence…I think there are some interesting questions we have to answer that certainly would lend one to believe that the Russians had at least in some part something to do with Snowden’s theft of NSA files.”
Snowden responded to Rogers’ claim as being absurd.
On today’s Meet the Press with David Gregory, the host asked the Chairman about what evidence he had that the NSA whistleblower was under the influence of Russian intelligence.
Here’s the back-and-forth (watch the video below):
Gregory: I want to touch on a couple of other areas quickly. On the issue of the N.S.A. surveillance and Edward Snowden, when you were last on this program, Chairman, you were very pointed, suggesting that he may have had help from the Russians, that Edward Snowden may have been a Russian spy, may be a Russian spy. He’s called that absurd. No new details have come to light on this. Were you irresponsible in making such a charge without having specific evidence to back it up? To just sort of float that out there?
Rogers: Well, first of all, I see all the intelligence and all the evidence from everything from his activities leading up to this event to very suspicious activity during the event. And so when you talk to the folks who are doing the investigation, they cannot rule it out.
So here’s what we know, David. We know today no counterintelligence official in the United States does not believe that Mr. Snowden, the N.S.A. contractor, is not under the influence of Russian intelligence services. We believe he is. I certainly believe he is today. So now we all agree that he’s under the influence of Russian intelligence services today.
For the investigators, they need to figure out well, when did that influence start. And was he interested in cooperating earlier than the timeline would suggest. So you’re talking to a guy who stole information, who is now in the arms of intelligence services saying, “Well, gosh, whatever you guys say is absurd. Only I can define the truth.” That’s ridiculous on its face.
I do believe there’s more to this story. He is under the influence of Russian intelligence officials today. He is actually supporting in an odd way this very activity of brazen brutality and expansionism of Russia. He needs to understand that. And I think Americans need to understand that. We need to put it in proper context.
Gregory: But what is the evidence that he is under that influence? As he has pointed out, why go to Hong Kong? When he originally got to Russia, he was stranded in the airport. That’s no way to treat a spy, he has pointed out. So you’re arguing a lot, but where’s the evidence to suggest that he’s actually under the influence of a foreign intelligence agency?
Rogers: Well, again, today, we believe he’s under the influence and every counterintelligence official believes that. You won’t find one that doesn’t believe today he’s under the influence of Russian intelligence services. That we can all agree on. It’s when did that start that there is– I think there is really good evidence. In this case, as the more we look into this, I think the more you’re going to find that that date gets further and further away from his story. Matter of fact, I don’t believe the story he tells about both the airport or his activities in Hong Kong are accurate.
It just gets more complicated and as I said he’s clearly in Moscow, under the influence of intelligence services for a country that is expanding its borders today using military force. I think there’s a lot more questions that need to be answered here.
There you are. Rogers believes Snowden is under the influence of Moscow. I guess that’s all the evidence that’s required.
[…] Two months later on Meet the Press, when pressed by host David Gregory concerning what evidence the Chairman had concerning his January statement, the only “evidence” Rogers could produce was: […]