Ahead of the Election: Dr. Bradley Foerster and Dr. Myria Petrou Seek Direct Answers from Dr. Paul Cronin on Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election
With another U.S. election approaching, Dr. Bradley Foerster and Dr. Myria Petrou renewed requests for clarification of statements Dr. Foerster attributes to Dr. Paul Cronin concerning Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
The October 31, 2026 email to Dr. Cronin and Dr. Aine Kelly asks what Dr. Cronin acknowledges saying, what Dr. Cronin denies saying, the source of the information, and Dr. Cronin’s reasons for conveying the information to Dr. Foerster and Duaa Altaee. The email also seeks answers about University of Michigan medical-billing concerns and the unidentified caller known as “Nick.”
The email directly addresses the 2025 litigation notice Dr. Foerster previously sent Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly and expressly invites substantive responses from both recipients.
The September 11, 2026 Joint Status Report records the FBI’s previously reported completion of production, with 16 pages remaining under consultation with another entity. Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou report finding no FBI-generated documents naming Dr. Cronin or Dr. Kelly among the released records.
Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou state in the email: “We have been advised that there is no impediment to our corresponding with you or to either of you responding to the questions below.” The email asks Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly to identify any continuing concern about the earlier notice or any other instruction preventing a response.
The October 31 request follows Dr. Foerster’s earlier emails of August 3, August 19, and September 3, 2026 . Dr. Foerster received no response.
Dr. Foerster’s account remains that Dr. Cronin repeatedly discussed Russian interference in the election with Dr. Foerster and Duaa Altaee during the summer of 2016 .
The October 31 email asks Dr. Cronin to clarify the scope of Dr. Cronin’s later civil-suit denials: does Dr. Cronin deny making Russia-related statements, or does Dr. Cronin dispute particular wording or details in the complaint? The email also asks about the source and purpose of the statements and what Dr. Cronin expected Dr. Foerster and Duaa Altaee to do with the information.
The correspondence returns to two exchanges from 2018. An April message sent under Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly’s names opposed disclosure, stating: “We believe this will ruin all our lives and destroy our chances of future cases.”
Later, after Dr. Foerster voluntarily dismissed the civil case against Dr. Cronin, Dr. Foerster asked Dr. Cronin to come forward and testify honestly and truthfully. Dr. Cronin replied, “I will.”
Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou ask Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly to explain the April warning. The email also asks Dr. Cronin to identify the promised testimony and any subsequent account provided to an investigator or other authority.
Dr. Foerster stands behind the September 1, 2018 and December 10, 2025 affidavits. Dr. Petrou stands behind the December 10, 2025 affidavit describing statements Dr. Foerster and Duaa Altaee relayed to Dr. Petrou. Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou welcome questioning under oath about the respective accounts and ask Dr. Cronin to provide a sworn account.
The central question: what does Dr. Cronin acknowledge saying about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, and will Dr. Cronin give an account under oath?
The email describes Dr. Cronin raising medical-billing concerns with Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou and seeking Dr. Foerster’s help because tenure offered Dr. Foerster greater protection.
The correspondence asks why Dr. Cronin did not come forward as a witness when Dr. Cronin’s reported statements and absence became arguments against Dr. Foerster during dismissal proceedings. Supporting exhibits include Dr. Foerster’s October 25, 2018 request for testimony, Dr. Cronin’s response, and the hearing transcript.
Dr. Cronin also reportedly told Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou about a recording of Radiology Chair Dr. Reed Dunnick acknowledging that billing issues had come to light following the complaint all four physicians made to the University of Michigan Office of General Counsel and that an administrator had to be let go. The email asks why Dr. Cronin did not provide the recording and whether the recording still exists.
The central question: why did Dr. Cronin ask Dr. Foerster to help raise the concerns, then fail to support Dr. Foerster’s account when Dr. Foerster faced dismissal?
The correspondence traces the appearance of “Nick,” a caller claiming that Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou were extorting Dr. Cronin. Ann Arbor Police Department (AAPD) records document the allegations. Dr. Cronin subsequently denied extortion and related claims under oath.
The email asks Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly to help establish “Nick’s” identity. The correspondence also asks Dr. Cronin to reconcile Dr. Cronin’s civil-suit answer with a memorandum from the University of Michigan Office for Institutional Equity (OIE/Title IX office) documenting 18 emails attempting to arrange an interview. The memorandum acknowledges some replies but states that Dr. Cronin never proposed a meeting date.
The central question: will Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly help identify “Nick” and resolve allegations associated with devastating consequences for the Foerster–Petrou family?
A separate October 31 email transmitted Exhibit R, an AI-assisted dramatic reconstruction based on Dr. Foerster’s recollections—not an original recording or a verbatim transcript.
Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou ask Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly to identify specific inaccuracies and clarify statements Dr. Cronin acknowledges or denies making. The email also requests information about surviving copies of the original recordings.
Listen to or download the audio reconstruction (MP3) →
The October 31 emails reproduced below set out the full questions and invite corrections, explanations, and supporting documents from Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly.
Read Supporting Exhibits A–Q →
The combined PDF contains 170 pages, with a cover sheet identifying each exhibit. The audio reconstruction is separate.
Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou close by describing the continuing consequences for Dr. Foerster and Dr. Petrou’s children, Maria and Peter, both very young when the events disrupted family life. The request seeks direct answers from Dr. Cronin and Dr. Kelly and an accurate account of events with lasting consequences for the entire family.
Selected Reporting
- Bradley Foerster Submits 140-Exhibit, 1,121-Page Documentary Chronology to FBI for Supervisory Review of the Investigation Involving Dr. Bradley Foerster, Dr. Myria Petrou, and Duaa Altaee
- From One FBI File to a Legislative Proposal: Peter and Maria Foerster Ask Senator Van Hollen's Office and Congressman Jamie Raskin to Consider a Uniform Administrative Framework for Federal Investigations
- Eva Feldman Documentary Chronology: 139 Exhibits on NIH R01NS082304, University Proceedings, and Federal Investigation — No Response Received
- Bradley Foerster and Myria Petrou Send Ann Arbor Officials Documentary Chronology on AAPD and Related Federal Investigations — No Response Received
- Timothy Lynch Documentary Chronology: 63 Exhibits on University of Michigan Office of General Counsel, University Investigations, and Law Enforcement — No Response Received
- Bradley Foerster and Myria Petrou Documentary Chronology: 8 Exhibits Document More Than Two Years of Efforts to Trace Bank of Ann Arbor's $1.4 Million Sheriff's Sale Credit Bid — No Response Received