Malcolm Nance, a former naval intelligence officer and an MSNBC contributor, has become one of the most recognizable voices on Trump-related scandals. According to Brian Williams, MSNBC’s chief anchor, Nance is “a cross between Batman and ‘Fight Club.’ ” The weekend-morning host Joy Reid called Nance “very rational, even though the things that he’s telling you will completely freak you out. He’s super knowledgeable, but he’s also that calming friend.” Nance, however, has been frequently criticized by both the left and the right for promoting false or unproven claims, often having to do with Russia. In March, Nance tweeted that he was convinced that Carter Page was an F.B.I. double agent; he has written, of Trump, “little comes from his mouth that was not put there by shaping actions and experiences with Russians, and was carefully planned to benefit the Russian Republic.” This month, on “Morning Joe,” he claimed that the Russian government had been looking for ways to exploit Trump since the mid-eighties. “Donald Trump sees the world only through Moscow’s point of view,” he stated.
In 2016, Nance wrote the best-selling book “The Plot to Hack America: How Putin’s Cyberspies and WikiLeaks Tried to Steal the 2016 Election,” which he followed up with another best-seller, “The Plot to Destroy Democracy: How Putin and His Spies Are Undermining America and Dismantling the West.” He has written what could be considered the third part of a trilogy: “The Plot to Betray America: How Team Trump Embraced Our Enemies, Compromised Our Security, and How We Can Fix It.” I recently spoke by phone with Nance, whose intelligence work included stints in the Middle East and North Africa. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed his fears about the Trump Presidency, whether he believes Trump and members of his circle are foreign agents, and the danger of a public square full of conspiracy theories.
Amid all the lies we hear from the White House, how important is it for journalists and commentators to pursue the truth and speak truthfully?
It’s critically important, and that’s one of the reasons why I’ve got three books now on the Trump Administration and their activities. One of the things that I try to make very clear is that I have to deeply, deeply source the information that I’m using. I think that the lowest amount I had was four hundred references, and in this one there are over seven hundred references.
You have written and spoken a lot about Russian disinformation campaigns. How important is it to the Russian government to disseminate untruths and make sure the public square is full of speculation and misinformation?
What the American public has seen play out since 2016 is critical to their strategy, and it really started far, far before that, in a large way, in 2014. You are watching a strategic plan that’s being executed by Russia. None of this is piecemeal; none of this is small-time—it is a long ball game. And they need to use disinformation because, you have to realize, their leader is an ex-K.G.B. officer who used extensive amounts of disinformation that was developed by the K.G.B. And then, when he trained to be the head of Russian Intelligence, he realized all of those old K.G.B. tactics and strategies and techniques were applicable in the real world. But now technology had caught up to where they could be effective, whereas they were never effective in the past. So a person with a laptop can be just as powerful as the New York Times, but with the old disinformation strategies and tactics, which would attack the fault lines of the American experiment. And so it’s very critical to the Russians. One third of the American public refuses to believe the U.S. news media, but we’ll believe propaganda generated by the Russian Federation intelligence agencies.
“They put a set of rose-colored glasses on his face,” you recently stated about the Russian government. “Donald Trump sees the world only through Moscow’s point of view.” What did this mean?
Perception management is a technique in which you frame the information sphere around your opponent, whether it’s an individual or a nation, with so much information that is relatively credible to where your opponent adopts the framework that you are giving him, so that it’s sort of like a pair of rose-colored glasses, right? Only, instead of you needing them, they are created for you and customized around your personality, around how you see the world. And then that disinformation and propaganda—truths, half-truths, and lies—it’s been fitted around you slowly, like boiling the frog, to where you adopt a framework, which only benefits Russia.
Donald Trump got his glasses fitted, so to speak, at that secret meeting at the Nobu restaurant with the twelve richest oligarchs in Russia, including a representative from Putin. [In 2013, Trump met with Russian businessmen at Nobu restaurant in Moscow.] No one knows what was said in it, but we can tell the parameters of it because of how he behaves. And, from that point on, there was nothing negative he could ever say about Russia or Vladimir Putin. So now the reason his perspective constantly complements Russia is because his own education on Russia, Ukraine, and that world has been crafted by Moscow. So he sees it from their world view.
What about the idea, though, that he sees the world through the prism of his own self-interest, combined with a general preference for strongmen and autocracy, as we see when he talks about North Korea or Turkey?
This year, I went to Putin’s office when he [worked] in Dresden, and I learned quite a bit from the experts out there in Germany about how he behaved.
This was the office from when he was a K.G.B. guy in East Germany?
In Dresden, right. Putin learned his ground-game human-intelligence activities very well. It gave him a very, very unique perspective on East versus West and how money motivated virtually every person. We have this acronym, MICE, which you use to recruit spies. “M” is money, “I” is ideology, “C” is coercion or compromise, “E” is ego or excitement. And that’s how you get a person to betray their nation. Putin would have seen when “The Apprentice” came to Russia as a TV show—he would have called back and said to his intelligence staff, ‘Someone go get me the dossier on Donald Trump.’ And then they would have realized that they had been surveilling Donald Trump since 1977. He had an extensive K.G.B. folder. [No evidence has been found to substantiate this claim. According to the Guardian, the Czechoslovakian intelligence agency became interested in Trump as early as 1977. The article also notes that “it’s unclear to what degree the KGB and StB shared or coordinated Trump material.”]
You’re saying that because he married a woman from Czechoslovakia, which was behind the Iron Curtain?
Of course. Every intelligence agency does this when you have people who are noteworthy. However, back in the Communist days and the Cold War, every Westerner who went to the East was evaluated for an intelligence recruitment.
So, you’re not saying he was a special agent going back forty years?
Oh, no, no, no, no—no one has ever said that.
You called him a “witting asset,” correct?
Well, I called him a witting asset in [2016]. What I said was he was under surveillance. They had him on full coverage, where they collected all of his phone calls. When he visited Czechoslovakia, they had agents in place around him; they attempted to recruit him. They keep these records.
And then, he offers himself to Russia by wanting to go to Russia to build Trump Tower Moscow 1.0. I’m not saying any of that happened; I’m just saying this man has an extensive dossier, perhaps even a filing cabinet of information that is in the possession of Russian Federation intelligence today. The K.G.B. didn’t just disappear.
Right, but when you say that we have “subordinated our national security to Vladimir Putin, and it’s been said to be the most brilliant intelligence operation in the history of mankind,” and add, “If you are in this matrix they have constructed and you are witting, then you belong to them. All of your decisions are crafted and shaped to benefit them, even if it’s going to benefit you financially or personally”—doesn’t that imply more than what you are saying?
Let me explain this. First, you start off as a useful idiot, right? Next is unwitting assets, and an unwitting asset is a person who doesn’t know that there was an intelligence operation around him. The next progression is a witting asset. I have never said the next step. I have never said Donald Trump was an agent of Russia. An agent is a term of art, which means you are actually recruited, you are briefed about who you work for, you sign a contract, and you get tasked to carry out certain acts. No one’s ever considered that.
You tweeted that Glenn Greenwald “shows his true colors as an agent of Trump and Moscow.”
Well, Glenn—first off, I was speaking rhetorically on Twitter. And I was responding to the fact that Glenn Greenwald, who used to be a journalist in my estimation—now who knows what he is. I mean, he lives in Brazil; he throws firebombs; he’s a Fox News contributor. [Greenwald has appeared on Fox but is not an official contributor.] And that was in relation to him being in Moscow with Edward Snowden, and having a sit-down with Edward Snowden. And he talked about it on Russia Today. All right, so, in my estimation, as a citizen, Glenn Greenwald has an affinity that he will have to explain himself. How many people get to sit down with Edward Snowden? I will tell you right now—everyone knows it’s a fact—Edward Snowden is under the control, and he lives in the residence that’s provided by, the Russian state security service, the F.S.B. His lawyer, if I’m not mistaken, is an F.S.B. representative of the Russian state. You can’t get access to him unless the F.S.B. gives you access. [Snowden has said, “I have my own apartment. I have my own income. I live a fully independent life. I have never and will never accept money or housing or any other assistance from the Russian government.” His Russian lawyer, Anatoly Kucherena, has ties to the F.S.B.] Every word of what I’ve put out there, besides the fact that it is heavily sourced, has been proven true by the Mueller report, Senate Intelligence reports, House reports, the National Directorate of Intelligence reports.
But when you write, as you did in your last book, “When 45th President of the United States Donald J. Trump speaks, little comes from his mouth that was not put there by shaping actions and experiences with Russians, and was carefully planned to benefit the Russian Republic,” it’s hard to say that has been proven true.
Exactly. That’s my opinion. That’s my analysis.
That is different than being proved true by the Mueller report.
That’s why it is called analysis. Can I just make another point? Journalists have a standard of reporting that they have to meet, right?
Yes.
O.K. Well, journalists should stick to that, right? We all agree.
Yep.
O.K. Well, what about former intelligence officers who aren’t journalists?
Well, I think that, when they’re writing books and they’re going on MSNBC, they should also be held to standards.
Let me tell you something. We are held to standards, and I’m held to a very, very high standard. As the only African-American in national security in the United States right now (even Jeh Johnson is in domestic security), I’m held to a pretty high standard. I’m held to a much higher standard. In fact, when I made a negative comment about Edward Snowden—who, by the way, compromised missions that I worked on at the National Security Agency that, literally, I swore my life to defend, right? When I do my writing, it is not only the most quantified writing out there; it is accurate to whatever source that I use. And, when I do an analysis of Donald Trump, that is based upon my experience, it is based upon the information that I see; it is based upon the things we can all see with our very eyes. But, you know, I am not the F.B.I. Counterintelligence Division. I don’t have the dossier on Donald Trump.
You have an intelligence background, so I want to understand this.
I also have about four hundred thousand words written on this. It’s more than just the occasional comment I make on TV.
Speaking of words, you write, “In the words of the common person on the street, he is considered by many to be a traitor.” Do you think he is a traitor?
Rhetorically. In my last book, in the last chapter, I described what a traitor is, according to law. According to the law, a traitor is a person who has aided and abetted a foreign entity in time of war, right? Even in this book, I go over it, and you have to talk about whether you’re talking about legally or whether you’re talking about rhetorically. Now, Donald Trump uses the word “traitor” often. Do I believe he’s a traitor? No, I don’t believe he’s a traitor, because he doesn’t meet the legal definition. You notice the title of my book is “The Plot to Betray America,” not “The Plot to Commit Treason.”
You write, “little comes from his mouth that was not put there by shaping actions and experiences with the Russians, and was carefully planned to benefit the Russian Republic.” So is—
It’s true. It’s all true. I wrote an entire chapter on how they do it. They do it to a lot of people. They’ve done it to the entire Republican Party now.
Let me just ask you whether you think there’s a danger in over-interpreting things as being part of Russian plots. After Joy Reid got in trouble for anti-gay blog posts, you tweeted, “Clearly there is a Discredit & Humiliate campaign afoot. Apparently all progressives are secretly anti-gay bloggers. This has Wikileaks & AltRight written all over it. Expect more.” Do you stand by this?
Did you hear the word “Russian” in that comment, because your question said that I associated that with a Russian plot.
Well, I assume you think WikiLeaks is a Russian front.
No, I think WikiLeaks is a Russian laundromat for the D.N.C. hacks, which was validated not only by the Mueller report but also by the arrest of Julian Assange. And so that had nothing to do with Russia.
O.K., so conspiracy theories.
That was just talking about disinformation. There are people who have an agenda on Joy Reid. Every time Joy Reid tweets on a Saturday morning or even comes on television, go through her timeline and see how many people come out who are from the alt-right—not from the left, not from the libertarian left, not from the L.G.B.T.Q. community, but from the conservative right—who come out and say, “Joy Reid is a homophobe who just destroys her information, forges her information.” What that tells me is there was a meta-narrative within their world which has decided that this is how Joy Reid is going to be seen within that alt-right world. It’s essentially a hammering point they use to attack all of their critics. It’s like Hillary Clinton and the e-mails. You understand how they craft their messages. I see those craftings, and I tend to see them a lot faster than the news media does.
So you stand by that?
Well, I’m attuned to intelligence activities. You know, I wrote a whole book on ISIS information warfare as we studied it over multiple years. So that was about something that had nothing to do with the Russians, but it has to do with the alt-right and people who just didn’t like Joy Reid. So, yeah, I stand by that.
But you don’t think that there was any “there there,” so to speak?
You know what? I’m going to tell you something that I tell everybody.
Please.
I am a former cryptologist from the National Security Agency. If there is anything that I personally can assure you as an American citizen, it’s that there is nothing in this world that is digital that cannot be manipulated.
She apologized for the posts.
I don’t know. That’s up to her—go ask her. [After claiming there was a hack, Reid apologized when there was no evidence of one.] But, you know what? That was Joy Reid and her past. We all have digital footprints back there, but me talking about the alt-right attacking her, that’s real.
You think the Podesta e-mails were forged in some way?
I never said the Podesta e-mails were forged, and I have tried to educate the country on it.
“Official Warning,” you tweeted. “#PodestaEmails are already proving to be riddled with obvious forgeries and #blackpropaganda not even professionally done.”
There were. There were. Black propaganda is when you have something that is a piece of disinformation or misinformation or even crafted and fabricated information that is inserted into a stream of real information. That is the definition of black propaganda. What I said was that the Podesta package has misinformation, disinformation, and black propaganda. This was what I got from Julian Assange, right? Who swears nothing that he put out came from the Russians. He swears nothing that was ever done had any black propaganda in it or was disinformation. On the first day, there was a piece of black propaganda that was inserted in there not by whoever sent that package but by an alt-righter in the United States who did a clumsy edit of one of those e-mails and then put it back into that data stream like it was real. [The “black propaganda” Nance referred to in his tweet was created by an Internet prankster, who posted a fake speech by Hillary Clinton that included references to “bronies,” male fans of the cartoon “My Little Pony.” The author said he never intended the post to be linked to WikiLeaks.]
So what’s the big takeaway from this book for readers?
It’s very simple. If the first book was the analysis that showed you that I had predicted that Russia had done it and how they did it and how WikiLeaks was their laundromat, the second book is about Russian strategy. I never, by the way, identified what it is that they have over Donald Trump’s head. Nobody knows that yet. This one is strictly about Team Trump.
But you think it’s something?
Oh, absolutely. Something. Look, when you’re in debt to your bookie, you don’t insult him, and you do everything you can. You babysit his kids; you wash his car.
He was in debt to Russia, you are saying?
Of course, Trump is in some way, shape, or form. We don’t know, because it was never investigated in the Mueller report and now we’re finding out—I mean, even with the Ukraine operation, which is a component of that.
We have to speculate on it then, if we don’t know what it is.
But it’s there. In the intelligence community, we have this thing called black holes. A black hole is where all of the information that we have in every direction around a spot of nothing shows us that there is something there pulling in all of this information, right? The only thing we’re missing is the event horizon where we verify what’s going on. Donald Trump’s actions, his behaviors, his very words, which come right out of the mouth of Vladimir Putin on many subjects—we all see this. It’s documented. It’s everywhere. The entirety of global media has seen all these things, and, unless you don’t believe anything about the Russian operation against the United States, we all believe it. We all know it. We know there’s something there.
