Susan Miller, a former top CIA counterintelligence official who was linked to the controversial January 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian election meddling, recently caused quite a stir. She’s been telling some of her former colleagues that she was criminally charged and put on trial by Durham. However, it’s important to note that this claim is completely unfounded, as Durham never charged her, nor was she ever on trial.
Miller served as the Assistant CIA Director for Counterintelligence under John Brennan in 2016. On an episode of the Mission Implausible podcast, she made these claims about being targeted by Durham and then-Attorney General William Barr. Interestingly, both podcast hosts, John Sipher and Jerry O’Shea, were among the signatories of the infamous “51 intelligence experts” letter that called Hunter Biden’s laptop Russian disinformation.
Miller’s LinkedIn profile paints a dramatic picture, describing herself as a “Retired Senior (SIS) CIA Officer, currently target of Trump and Tulsi’s witchunt.” She also lists a bachelor’s degree in journalism from California Polytechnic State University-San Luis Obispo. Despite her claims, there is no public record to support the notion that she ever faced criminal charges.
On the podcast, Miller claimed that “Barr-Durham put me and a couple members of my team on trial” and filed a “criminal complaint” against her. However, a search of the federal criminal docket system shows no evidence of any such case. Just the News, a conservative outlet, reported that Miller had previously referred to Trump as a “dictator” and MAGA supporters as “Nazis.”
The Mission Implausible podcast episode description suggested that Miller has been targeted by Tulsi Gabbard for her work on a classified Russia report. It claimed the episode explored how Miller dealt with “newfound persecution.” During the podcast, Miller said her defense lawyer during the first Trump administration was Kenneth Wainstein, who also represented Brennan during the Durham investigation.
Currently, Miller is represented by attorney Mark Zaid, who specializes in national security cases. Zaid has previously represented national security officials and purported whistleblowers. He did not respond to requests for comment or confirmation of Miller’s claims from Just the News.
Despite making repeated claims about being charged and tried by Barr and Durham, Miller has never produced any evidence of a “criminal complaint.” She mentioned on the podcast that her lawyer found the whole situation laughable. Miller claimed that the alleged charges were related to insurrection, though she admitted she wasn’t entirely sure.
Miller recounted that a briefing effort she was involved with during the 2016 election was well-received by Trump. She said that after the briefing, she was called into the Office of General Counsel and informed of the supposed charges. Miller and her team reportedly laughed off the charges, questioning the rationale behind them.
Miller has never identified who in the Office of General Counsel allegedly informed her of these charges. Caroline Krass, Courtney Simmons Elwood, and Kate Heinzelman, who served as CIA general counsels during relevant periods, did not respond to inquiries about whether they or their colleagues informed Miller of any charges.
Miller said she hired Kenneth Wainstein in response to the Durham investigation, which she claimed cost her $1,500 an hour. Wainstein, known for representing Brennan in relation to Durham’s scrutiny, did not comment on Miller’s claims. Miller continued to assert her imaginary prosecution and trial, claiming to have spent hours before a tribunal.
Miller insisted that during her supposed tribunal, she questioned what crime she was alleged to have committed. She suggested the tribunal mumbled something about “trying to bring down a government.” O’Shea, one of the podcast hosts, endorsed Miller’s story, likening it to authoritarian regimes.
O’Shea claimed it was reminiscent of situations in Russia, Cuba, or China, where people fear speaking freely. He suggested that under “Trump 2.0,” people are afraid and face criminal charges for expressing their beliefs. Miller’s claims remain unsubstantiated, as she continues to discuss her alleged persecution.
