Woodward’s ‘Blue Wave’ Launch Pad: Fear Crazy Trump!


Mark Alexander evaluates Bob Woodward’s new book ironically released on 9/11, “Fear: Trump in the White House”.

Alexander finds it interesting that Woodward’s book and the New York Times article by the infamous and probably treasonous Anonymous have many similar talking points. Both the Woodward book and the NYT article have been denounced as lies by those accused of saying or participating in chaos in the Trump Administration.

 

And now, the Alexander evaluation.

 

JRH 9/12/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or despising) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Woodward’s ‘Blue Wave’ Launch Pad: Fear Crazy Trump!

 

Woodward-Trump — Left’s ‘Crazy Trump’ Fear Smear

 

By Mark Alexander 

Sep. 12, 2018

The Patriot Post

 

“[Trump] is doing what he campaigned on. Some policies may not work out, but they’re not ‘crazy.'” —Brit Hume

 

“Without Freedom of Thought there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as Public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech.” —Benjamin Franklin (1722)

 

The prospect of any factual wrongdoing associated with the Democrat Party’s fabricated “Trump/Putin collusion” conspiracy, along with the hope for some tangential shred of indictable evidence sufficient to take down Donald Trump, continues to fade.

 

Since Democrats can’t run against peace and prosperity in the upcoming midterm elections, they’re launching yet another divide-and-conquer strategy to help defeat Republicans in the Senate and House — hoping to divert voter attention from the considerable Trump administration successes.

 

Thus, the Demo-gogues, in collusion with their Leftmedia propagandists who have aptly demonstrated their editorial disdain for Trump (to put it kindly), are promoting a new theme: “Fear Crazy Trump — Vote Democrat.” It’s a perfect fit, given that the delusional decompensation among Demo constituents is growing louder and more desperate every day.

 

Prepping for their “Crazy Trump” campaign, the first installment came last week, free of charge, compliments of The New York Times editorial page. The Times ran an “anonymous op-ed letter” from a “senior official in the Trump administration.” If we assume that “Anonymous” is in fact “senior,” a label that could loosely be applied to more than 1,500 people with White House credentials, then there’s a dishonorable deep-state mole.

 

Anonymous writes that he/she/it singlehandedly protected the nation from Trump’s “misguided impulses,” because our duly elected president is “not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.” He/she/it even claims to have “preserved our democratic institutions” by removing documents from Trump’s desk before he could sign them.

 

But it can be fairly assumed that this inane, unsigned letter was all about setting the stage for a “Fear Crazy Trump” blockbuster book that was released this week.

 

Ever since the Demos successfully forced Richard M. Nixon’s resignation after the Watergate cover-up 45 years ago, they have sought a sequel. Enter Bob Woodward, the once-respected Washington Post reporter who, with Carl Bernstein, broke the Watergate story.

 

Woodward was once a reputable journalist, but his credibility is long past its expiration date. He keeps bobbing to the surface periodically, promising a catch, and his latest and likely last entry into presidential politics debuted this week: Fear: Trump in the White House.

 

The book was released Tuesday, on the 17th anniversary of the 9/11 Islamist attack. (Apparently, Woodward and his publisher were banking that there would be no competing scandal coverage on that solemn day.) “Fear is the most intimate portrait of a sitting president ever published during the president’s first years in office,” say the breathless folks at Simon and Schuster.

 

The Washington Post, which does the bidding of leftist mega-billionaire Jeff Bezos, a charter member of the “Archenemies of Liberty Club,” predictably offered accolades for the book. Of course, Woodward is still on Bezos’s WaPo payroll as an “associate editor.”

 

According to the Post, “A central theme of the book is the stealthy machinations used by those in Trump’s inner sanctum to try to control his impulses and prevent disasters. … Woodward describes ‘an administrative coup d’etat’ and a ‘nervous breakdown’ of the executive branch, with senior aides conspiring to pluck official papers from the president’s desk so he couldn’t see or sign them.”

 

That’s right, protecting the nation from Trump’s “impulses” by plucking papers from his desk before he can sign them — precisely the claim made in the anonymous NYT letter. Could there be a connection? (That was a rhetorical question.)

 

Fear Bk JK

 

In an effort to distance himself from the anonymous Times letter, Woodward laughably criticized The Gray Lady, insisting that if he were a New York Times editor, he wouldn’t have published an anonymous letter. “I wouldn’t have used it. Too vague and does not meet the standards of trying to describe specific incidents. Specific incidents are the building blocks of journalism.”

 

That’s true, except those are precisely the “building blocks” absent from Woodward’s book on Trump.

 

Criticizing the Times was a supreme example of hypocrisy and arrogance, as if Woodward believes we should all fall under his “Trust Bob” spell regardless of the fact that his standards are no better than the rest of the Leftmedia hacks.

 

But such criticism is typical of Woodward, who for the last two decades has arrogantly promoted himself as a god above mere mass media mortals and talkingheads. For example, in March of this year, he was questioned about the Trump presidency as a “test” for the MSM. He was asked specifically, “Do you think the media is failing the test?”

 

Woodward responded: “Reporters have at times become emotionally unhinged. … In lots of reporting, particularly on television [and in] commentary, there’s kind of a self-righteousness and smugness, and people kind of ridiculing the president. When we reported on Nixon, it was obviously a very different era, but we did not adopt a tone of ridicule. The tone was, ‘What are the facts?’”

 

Under Ben Bradlee, WaPo editor at the time Woodward and Bernstein unearthed the Watergate cover-up, the standards for journalism there were very different. Back then, Woodward would’ve been expected to focus on facts — and fired if he’d wrapped them in ridicule. But the Post dropped that journalistic standard when Bezos took over.

 

And today, Woodward is the grand master of “self-righteousness and smugness.”

 

Before Woodward’s “Crazy Trump” narrative was released, there were already six high-level denials from very “senior” Trump administration officials, by name. Among them are White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, who offered this assessment of Woodward’s book: “[It] is total BS. … This is another pathetic attempt to smear people close to President Trump and distract from the administration’s many successes.”

 

Defense Secretary James Mattis responded to Woodward on the record: “The contemptuous words about the President attributed to me in Woodward’s book were never uttered by me or in my presence. While I generally enjoy reading fiction, this is a uniquely Washington brand of literature, and his anonymous sources do not lend credibility. … In serving in this administration, the idea that I would show contempt for the elected Commander-in-Chief, President Trump, or tolerate disrespect to the office of the President from within our Department of Defense, is a product of someone’s rich imagination.”

 

Here’s White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders: “People have come forward to say that Woodward never reached out to corroborate statements that were attributed to them, which seems incredibly reckless … to not … get a $10 fact-checker to call around and find out if half of these quotes were accurate.”

 

For his part, President Trump declared, “It’s just another bad book. He’s had a lot of credibility problems. It’s just nasty stuff. I never spoke to him. Maybe I wasn’t given messages that he called.”

 

Of course, Woodward and his Leftmedia promoters dismiss the president’s comments. But prior to Woodward’s anti-Trump hit piece and its adoption as a launchpad for the Demos’ midterm “blue wave,” Woodward had been the object of a lot of Leftmedia criticism for lack of evidence and sources, especially when he stepped off the Leftmedia reservation and dared criticize Hillary Clinton.

 

In August of 2015, for example, Woodward exercised his once-famous journalistic reputation in evaluating Clinton’s infamously illegal communication subterfuge. He declared, “[This] reminds me of the Nixon tapes: Thousands of hours of secretly recorded conversations that Nixon thought were exclusively his. … 60,000 emails and Hillary Clinton has said 30,000 of them, half, were personal and they were deleted. Who decided that? What’s in those emails? … The big question about Clinton is, who is she? … The answers are probably not going to be pretty.”

 

Needless to say, that assessment didn’t get a lot of press coverage.

 

Leftist literary journalist Joan Didion says of Woodward’s writing, “Measurable cerebral activity is virtually absent.” Furthermore, he “covers the story not as it is occurring but as it is presented, which is to say as it is manufactured.”

 

There are also scholarly critics of the content of his books, from his “Deep Throat” character in his bestselling All the President’s Men, to Veil, in which he stands accused of fabricating a key deathbed confession by former CIA Director William Casey.

 

But wait. There’s more.

 

Jonathan Chait in New York magazine: “What the hell happened to Bob Woodward? … As an analyst, Woodward is a particular kind of awful.”

 

Charles Pierce in Esquire: “The full depth of Bob Woodward’s plunge into sheer hackery.”

 

Arianna Huffington in HuffPost: “He’s the dumb blonde of American journalism.”

 

Jeffrey St. Clair in CounterPunch: “Woodward, despite filing one dubious story after another, retains his position as an éminence grise of DC reporters.”

 

Noam Scheiber in New Republic: “It is relentlessly biased against the president.”

 

Max Holland in Newsweek: “Woodward is the same now as he ever was. His misrepresentation … is only the latest in a long string of questionable journalistic episodes. … It reveals a grotesquely swollen ego fed by 40 years of hero worship.”

 

Even Ben Bradlee, Woodward’s Washington Post editor at the time of Watergate, suspected he fabricated elements in All the President’s Men.

 

So, what to make of the “Crazy Trump” fear-mongering by Woodward and his renewed Leftmedia sycophantry?

 

Brit Hume, an even-keeled political observer, offered this assessment: “The problem is of course … [Woodward] doesn’t disclose his sources, he doesn’t annotate his books, [and] he doesn’t give you a sense of who the people are with whom he spoke. … A tremendous amount of Woodward’s reports are never verified. … It leaves us in a poor position to evaluate the work. … What I would like to see … is a connection between these [claimed] outbursts of the president and real policies and actions on his part that match their claims about how reckless he is. I haven’t seen that. … He’s doing what he campaigned on. Some policies may not work out, but they’re not ‘crazy.’”

 

Fact is, a broad swath of American voters disgracefully characterized by Hillary Clinton as “deplorables” elected Donald Trump to accomplish three things with his “MAGA” platform:

 

  1. Drop a metaphorical bomb on Washington, including status quo politicos in both parties, special interests, regulatory and bureaucratic behemoths, failed trade- and national-security policies, and all the pundits and mainstream media outlets. He’s done that and continues to do so.

 

  1. Put our economy on the right track. He did that and continues to do so.

 

  1. Reestablish a conservative majority on the Supreme Court. He has done that and will continue to do so if Republicans hold the Senate.

 

So shocked was the Left after Clinton’s defeat that all of Trump’s actions are viewed by deranged leftists as “crazy.”

 

Will the Woodward/Demo-Leftmedia “Crazy Trump” strategy work? Can Democrats generate enough noise to energize the leftist base for a successful run on congressional control?

 

The midterm elections for control of the House and Senate will be very close.

 

But what America should fear most is the power the Leftmedia exercises over public opinion, and thus, control of the future of Liberty.

 

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Pro Deo et Libertate — 1776

________________________

The Patriot Post is a highly-acclaimed weekday digest of news, policy and opinion written from the heartland for grassroots leaders nationwide — not the MSM’s ubiquitous Beltway echo-chambers. Read More

 

Support The Patriot Fund

 

Copyright © 2018 The Patriot Post.

 

[From Email Alert:] REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND POSTING: Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: “The Patriot Post (https://patriotpost.us/subscribe)”

 

Intro to ‘Trump Delivers Prophetic Warning To Christian Leaders!’


Intro by John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Post & Video by Lance Wallnau

© August 30, 2018

An evangelist friend of my wife sent a Facebook Private Message to her from a gentleman named Lance Wallnau who put together an 18-minute podcast about a conversation President Trump had with some evangelists about the possible negative effects of the November 2018 election.

 

After I viewed the video, I was so impressed that I decided to cross post it on my Blog. I was even going to upload it to my Youtube Channel to share more effectively.

 

I had zero knowledge of who or what Lance Wallnau was about. In the process of looking for Wallnau I discovered he posted his own Youtube version which I will share.

 

In case you are in the same boat as me, here is some bio info on Dr. Lance Wallnau:

 

USA Today reports that he is one of only three evangelical leaders to have accurately predicted Donald Trump’s Presidency while running against 15 opponents. Dr. Wallnau’s Best Selling book, “Gods Chaos Candidate” explains the global shift that accompanies Trumps unexpected electoral upset. God is working in new and unprecedented ways among the nations.

 

Dr. Wallnau has shared platforms with best-selling authors Ken Blanchard and John Maxwell, and lectured at universities from Harvard and M.I.T. to the London School of Theology. Merging a thirty-year background consulting in business and the non-profit sector, Lance inspires visions of tomorrow with the clarity of today—connecting ideas to action. His students represent a tapestry spanning nations and spheres: from politicians, to CEO’s, entertainers and entrepreneurs. He currently directs the Lance Learning Group, a strategic teaching and consulting company based in Dallas, Texas.

 

Dr. Wallnau’s is a frequent television guest and conference keynote speaker. Thousands of leaders around the world attest to the lasting impact of their first encounter with Lance. If you’ve never heard him before you should  join with thousands of others – just check out his regular broadcasts on Periscope and Facebook Live, under Lance Wallnau. (ABOUT Dr. Lance Wallnau; LanceWallnau.com; © 2018 Lance Wallnau ~ All Rights Reserved)

 

MorningStar Ministries also has a short author’s bio: HERE.

 

In case you are interest, HERE’s a link Lance Wallnau Facebook post of the video.

 

AND below is the LanceWallnau.com post of the Youtube video, “TRUMP DELIVERS PROPHETIC WARNING TO CHRISTIAN LEADERS!”

 

Dr. Wallnau delivers a referendum on Christian Free Speech and Religious Liberty. The last couple of minutes Wallnau shares that CNN and Carl Bernstein lied about a Trump foreknowledge that Trump JR. was to meet Russians in Trump Tower to gather dirt on Crooked Hillary.

 

LISTEN! SHARE! VOTE in November 2018!

 

JRH 8/30/18 (Hat Tip: Sundra Girard & Diana Houk (my gorgeous wife)

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or despising) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

***********************

Trump Delivers Prophetic Warning To Christian Leaders!

 

By Lance Wallnau

August 29, 2018

LanceWallnau.com

 

Donald Trump delivers a private warning to Christian leaders about what’s happening in the country and how the midterms are going to be a referendum on your religion. Christians are so fragmented and scattered we don’t have a coherent mechanism for sharing messages like the left has. That needs to change!

 

VIDEO: Trump Delivers Prophetic Warning To Christian Leaders!

 

[Posted by Lance Wallnau

Published on Aug 30, 2018

 

President Donald Trump delivers a private, prophetic warning to Christian leaders about what’s happening in the country and how the midterms are going to be a referendum on your religion.

 

Christians are so fragmented and scattered we don’t have a coherent mechanism for sharing messages like the left has. That needs to change! We must spread the word, and take over these midterm elections.]

______________________

Intro to ‘Trump Delivers Prophetic Warning To Christian Leaders!’

Intro by John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© August 30, 2018

___________________

Trump Delivers Prophetic Warning To Christian Leaders!

 

Lance Wallnau Donation/Partner Page

 

TRUMP: ‘STAY TUNED’ FOR REVELATIONS ON ‘WITCH HUNT’


I just read an Art Moore/WND article with the central theme being President Trump is about to use his authority to declassify documents utilized by the DOJ/FBI to entice a FISC Judge (or Judges) to issue a FISA warrant (i.e. a secret warrant) to spy, err I mean, investigate the Donald Trump campaign for working with the Russians to rig the 2016 election cycle.

 

I suspect, along with many Conservatives, declassified documents will expose real criminal conspiracy of Democrats loyal to Obama and Crooked Hillary to rig an election victory or fabricate Trump crimes to impeach President Trump.

 

That sounds like Dem treason that should lead a direct line to Obama and Hillary Clinton. When the documents are declassified we will discover how powerful the Deep State is by whether or not indictments follow.

 

JRH 8/10/11

Please Support NCCR

************************

TRUMP: ‘STAY TUNED’ FOR REVELATIONS ON ‘WITCH HUNT’

Follows Giuliani’s warning Mueller probe about to ‘blow up’

 

By ART MOORE

August 9, 2018

WND

[Support an independent Press by sending cash to WND]

 

Following personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s warning that the special counsel investigation of alleged Russia-Trump campaign collusion is about to “blow up,” President Trump tweeted Thursday to “Stay tuned.”

 

“This is an illegally brought Rigged Witch Hunt run by people who are totally corrupt and/or conflicted,” the president wrote on Twitter.

 

“It was started and paid for by Crooked Hillary and the Democrats. Phony Dossier, FISA disgrace and so many lying and dishonest people already fired. 17 Angry Dems? Stay tuned!”

 

The Gateway Pundit blog cited investigative reporter Paul Sperry’s tweet pointing out that Trump is about to declassify the renewal application the Justice Department and the FBI submitted to a FISA court – signed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein – to obtain a warrant to spy on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page.

 

Trump also is declassifying the communications of twice-demoted Justice Department official Bruce Ohr with the author of the Democrat-funded, anti-Trump dossier of still unverified Russian propaganda that became the primary evidence submitted to the FISA court to spy on Page.

 

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who has been investigating Justice Department handling of the Hillary Clinton and Russia probes as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said in a Fox News interview Monday that Ohr “is going to become more and more important in this investigation and I think people should pay close attention to it.”

 

Sperry said in a tweet to look for Trump this month to declassify 20 redacted pages of the June 2017 FISA renewal and possibly 63 pages of emails and notes between Ohr and dossier author Christopher Steele. In addition, the official summaries of 12 FBI interviews with Ohr regarding Steele are expected to be declassified.

 

Giuliani asserted in an interview Wednesday night with the Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity that Mueller’s effort to go after President Trump will backfire.

 

“The reality is, the real story is not that this case isn’t going to fizzle,” he said. “It’s going to blow up on them. The real question is, what we talked about before, there’s a lot more to what they did that nobody knows about yet.”

 

Giuliani indicated the evidence is pointing to a conspiracy by the Democrats to defeat Trump.

 

There’s “a lot more to the obstruction of justice, to the collusion, to the fake dossier,” Giuliani said.

 

Hannity commented, “I know some of it.”

 

The only collusion in the case, the former New York City mayor said, is the intelligence community using the Steele dossier to obtain “several fraudulent FISA wires.”

 

“Can it get any worse?” Giuliani asked. “I mean, what do we need to know that this is a totally illegitimate investigation based on a report, a dossier that was paid for by Hillary Clinton and the Democrats – probably the biggest illegality so far, the biggest collusion so far. Completely made up.”

 

Giuliani said he believes “that when this plays out over the next year or two, it’s not going to be about President Trump.”

 

Citing his sources, Hannity said the truth, when it’s finally revealed, will “shock the heart, the soul, and the mind of any fair-minded American.”

______________________

© Copyright 1997-2018. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

About WND

 

WND, formerly WorldNetDaily, can best be explained by its mission statement: “WND is an independent news company dedicated to uncompromising journalism, seeking truth and justice and revitalizing the role of the free press as a guardian of liberty. We remain faithful to the traditional and central role of a free press in a free society – as a light exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse of power.

 

“We also seek to stimulate a free-and-open debate about the great moral and political ideas facing the world and to promote freedom and self-government by encouraging personal virtue and good character.”

 

Indeed, WND is a fiercely independent news site committed to hard-hitting investigative reporting of government waste, fraud and abuse.

 

Founded by Joseph and Elizabeth Farah in May 1997, it is now a leading Internet news site in both traffic and influence.

 

WND has broken some of the biggest, most significant and READ THE REST

 

SUPPORT WND DONATION

 

Gubarev’s Lawsuit will Expose Mueller Witch-Hunt


John R. Houk

© July 28, 2018

 

Persecutor-in-chief Robert Mueller has found ZERO criminal conspiracy between the Trump Campaign of 2016 and Russians. Or as the Leftist MSM might or should say – NO COLLUSION!

 

Aleksej Gubarev

 

Keeping this in mind, the Steele Dossier fake accusations against Donald Trump also accused Russian owned businesses of criminal hacking in election 2016. One of those accused Russians is tech mogul Aleksej Gubarev owner of Russian tech company XBT Holding which in turn owns Dallas based tech company Webzilla:

 

A report compiled by a former Western intelligence official as opposition research against Trump was made public Tuesday when BuzzFeed posted its 35 pages. The document included unsubstantiated claims of collusion between the Trump campaign team and the Kremlin.

 

It also alleged that global tech firm XBT Holding, with operations in Dallas, was instrumental in the hack of leaked Democratic Party emails that embarrassed Hillary Clinton and fellow Democrats.

 

XBT, owner of Dallas-based enterprise-hosting company Webzilla, is run by a successful Russian tech startup expert, Aleksej Gubarev. In a phone interview from Cyprus, where he said he’d lived since 2002, Gubarev said he was surprised to see his name in the report. (Tech firm named in Russian hacking report has operations in Dallas; By Wire Services; Dallas News; 1/11/17)

 

Aleksej Gubarev was not pleased to have his name associated with any kind of criminal election conspiracy. So, he is suing:

 

A Russian tech executive suing BuzzFeed News over the Steele dossier says he is vindicated by special counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russian nationals allegedly involved in cyber attacks against Democrats.

 

Aleksej Gubarev, the executive, says Mueller’s indictment shows he was not involved in hacks of Democratic National Committee emails, as the dossier alleges.

 

He has filed defamation lawsuits against BuzzFeed News, the website’s editor, Ben Smith and dossier author Christopher Steele. BuzzFeed published the dossier on Jan. 10, 2017. Steele, a former British spy, compiled the dossier as part of an anti-Trump research project funded by the DNC and Clinton campaign.

 

READ THE REST (RUSSIAN SUING OVER STEELE DOSSIER CALLS MUELLER INDICTMENT AN ‘UTTER VINDICATION’; By Chuck Ross; Daily Caller; 7/13/2018 11:53 PM)

 

And Tyler Durden reports:

 

A Russian venture capitalist and tech executive accused in the Steele dossier of “using botnets and porn traffic” to conduct cyberattacks on Democrats says that Friday’s indictment of 12 Russian nationals for hacking the DNC is an “utter vindication,” reports the Daily Caller.

 

 

In order to help defend themselves against Gubarev, BuzzFeed filed a lawsuit against the DNC to force them to hand over information related to the “Steele Dossier” after the DNC ignored a subpoena for proof they were hacked – including “digital remnants left by the Russian state operatives,” as well as a full version of the hacking report prepared by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.

 

The DNC notably wouldn’t allow FBI investigators to look at the server, instead relying on the hacking report prepared by CrowdStrike (founded by Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch – who sits on the very Anti-Russian Atlantic Council along with Evelyn “loose lips” Farkas).

 

“As part of the discovery process, BuzzFeed is attempting to verify claims in the dossier that relate to the hacking of the DNC,” said BuzzFeed spokesman Matt Mittenhal in a statement. “We’re asking a federal court to force the DNC to follow the law and allow BuzzFeed to fully defend its First Amendment rights.”

 

READ ENTIRETY (Russian Suing Over Steele Dossier Says Mueller Hacking Indictment An “Utter Vindication”; By Tyler Durden; Zero Hedge; 7/14/18 15:55)

 

Aleksej Gubarev recently learned that “District Court Judge Ursula Ungaro ruled that the firm’s client relationships “are not protected from disclosure by the First Amendment even though the opposition research it conducts on behalf of clients may be political in nature.”

 

Although Gubarev may believe Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russian GRU spies exonerates him of any complicity, Mueller have opened himself to proof his persecution of Trump is indeed a needless politically motivated witch-hunt.

 

JRH 7/28/18

Please Support NCCR

************************

Federal Judge Orders Fusion GPS To Provide Essential Answers

 

By Mark Megahan

27 JUL 2018 5:35 PM

UPDATED: 27 JUL 2018 6:18 PM

Conservative Daily Post

 

The Federal judge’s ruling was ‘everything’ that the lawyer for a Russian dot-com executive slandered by Christopher Steele had ‘hoped for.’ After using every legal stalling trick they could think of, the executives of Fusion GPS, including Glenn Simpson, are now compelled to answer key and sensitive questions at the heart of the controversy.

 

Outraged citizens have long been demanding to know how Barack Obama’s Department of Justice was corrupted into a more “Nixonian” political weapon than what happened at the Watergate hotel and now we will get to find out.

 

Unswayed by weak arguments put forth by Fusion GPS and it’s founder Glenn Simpson, District Court Judge Ursula Ungaro ruled that the firm’s client relationships “are not protected from disclosure by the First Amendment even though the opposition research it conducts on behalf of clients may be political in nature.”

 

Ungaro issued a ruling on Tuesday that pleased the American public a lot more than the lawyer for Russian mogul Aleksej Gubarev, but he’s ecstatic. In fact, the ruling has implications for the DNC.

 

Attorney Evan Fray-Witzer happily declared. “This ruling gave us everything that we had hoped for.” It was a long battle. “After a year of trying everything they could think of to avoid being deposed, Fusion is finally going to have to sit down and answer our questions.”

 

Outraged citizens have long been demanding to know how Barack Obama’s Department of Justice was corrupted into a more “Nixonian” political weapon than what happened at the Watergate hotel, and now they will get to find out.

 

As stated in the final order, “Representatives of Fusion GPS must answer a broad array of questions about the opposition research firm’s role in creating, investigating and disseminating the infamous Steele dossier.”

 

For over a year, Gubarev has been trying to interrogate Glenn Simpson and other Fusion GPS management in depositions, which are sessions of sworn testimony that happen in the lawyer’s offices, “to determine the purported factual basis for the dossier’s allegedly defamatory statements.”

 

The underlying defamation suit was filed against left-leaning news outlet BuzzFeed News. It spans two continents with one part filed in London and another filed in Miami, Florida.

 

The trial in Miami is scheduled to get underway this November. In the European half of the case, a British court also recently ruled in Gubarev’s favor, ordering that Christopher Steele will have to take the stand for questioning.

 

Gubarev alleges that Steele “defamed him,” by reporting that two of his companies, XBT Holding S.A. and its subsidiary, Webzilla, hijacked Democratic Party computers “using botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and conduct ‘altering operations.’”

 

Steele’s dossier blamed Webzilla for the hack. Now the Democratic National Committee will be deposed and asked to prove it.

 

The DNC has been frantically fighting a subpoena demanding “technical information” that they really don’t want to release.

 

Gubarev told them to fork over anything they might have, backing up their story with “‘clues’ and ‘evidence’ left behind by the cyber-intruders who breached the DNC’s network in 2016.”

 

Ungaro is allowing Gubarev’s attorneys to grill Fusion GPS representatives “about the firm’s dossier clients, its efforts to verify the dossier, its decision to hire dossier author Christopher Steele and its interactions with government officials and media outlets, including BuzzFeed.”

 

It seemed intentional to Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and fellow lawmaker Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) that all of Steele’s inflammatory material was leaked to the press, so they are digging into whether “Steele coordinated in any way with employees of the FBI or DOJ,” to leak the dossier to the media.

 

Other big questions that conservative lawmakers are asking are, did “the FBI, DOJ, or Office of National Intelligence” have a copy of the dossier before January 10, 2017; did Senator John McCain get a copy of the dossier’s first 33 pages on or about December 9, 2016 and; “whether, prior to January 10, 2017, Mr. Clapper, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Brennan, and/or Mr. Comey briefed President Obama about the Dossier and provided a synopsis of it.”

 

According to a disillusioned investigator on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation that turned whistleblower, Hillary Clinton was right in the middle of everything.

 

“The dossier and its related dirt was on a circular flight path aboard a courier service called ‘Air Clinton,’ and the FBI kept signing for the packages.”

 

Multiple versions of the same bogus information were hand carried around the globe by known Clinton “operatives” as mutually corroborating “support.”

 

When Peter Strzok’s FBI superiors wanted to know “which one” leaked to BuzzFeed, he told them it had to come from John McCain.

 

“The set is only identical to what McCain had. (it has differences from what was given to us by Corn and Simpson),” Strzok wrote in a recently surfaced email.

 

“Simpson all but acknowledged he and Steele provided the information to McCain ally David Kramer, who provided it to the Arizona senator to forward to the FBI.”

 

Christopher Steele alleged in previous testimony that he warned Kramer that the evidence in his file was “raw intelligence,” when he handed it over.

 

He only wanted McCain to have it for “analyzing, investigating and verifying” the contents and decide if action was “necessary for the purpose of protecting US national security.”

 

It also highlights just how extensively Clinton influenced and directed what would eventually become Robert Mueller’s Russia collusion special investigation.

 

Without checking any of the information, Obama administration officials presented it to the FISA court to get political wiretaps.

 

Strzok’s email also contradicts Glenn Simpson’s prior testimony to Congress under oath. He swore that the FBI didn’t get his copy, only Christopher Steele’s.

 

Former bureau investigators who reviewed Strzok’s text message note that “the FBI is supposed to be immune to manipulation by circular information flows, especially with sensitive investigations such as evaluating whether a foreign power tampered with an American election.”

 

In this case, they explain, “the generally same information kept walking through the FBI’s door for months, recycled each time by a new character with ties to Hillary Clinton or hatred for Trump.”

 

As American Thinker pointed out in anticipation of Inspector General Horowitz’ investigation report, the scheme engineered by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democrat National Committee “is going to make Watergate look like the petty burglary it was.”

______________________

Gubarev’s Lawsuit will Expose Mueller Witch-Hunt

John R. Houk

© July 28, 2018

____________________

Federal Judge Orders Fusion GPS To Provide Essential Answers

 

© 2017 Conservative Daily Post. All rights reserved.

 

About CDP

 

Conservative Daily Post is an independent news organization that thrives on independent journalism and truth.

 

Company History

 

Founded in the summer of 2016 during the tumultuous Trump-Clinton election cycle, CDP has grown to become one of the largest news publishers on the west coast. CDP strives to provide breaking headlines and notable news to our audience each and every day.

 

No Overall Bias?


OIG Pulls a Comey in Horowitz Report

 

John R. Houk

© June 15, 2018

The Horowitz IG Report on the FBI/DOJ handling of Crooked Hillary’s email server investigation came out June 14. I have no doubt the Leftist MSM will report this underlying theme: Horowitz found no political bias.

 

I haven’t personally read the 568-page report yet, but a quick read of primarily Conservative sources commenting the report, Michael Horowitz both let’s the FBI off the hook relating bias and singles out bias of certain FBI/DOJ members. How Horowitz can generalize no overall bias and individual bias simultaneously is beyond me. I believe another instalment of Horowitz’s IG investigation is in the future.

 

Here are some salient observations that Conservative sources are observing:

 

  • Obama administration Attorney General Loretta Lynch acted improperly in not cutting short a meeting aboard an aircraft with former President Bill Clinton during the investigation of Hillary Clinton. Both Lynch and Bill Clinton denied discussing the ongoing email probe during the meeting.

 

  • The FBI improperly permitted two Clinton aides who were witnesses in the investigation to sit in on the FBI’s questioning of Clinton

 

  • Comey drafted an initial statement exonerating Clinton months before the investigation ended. FBI agents’ actions surrounding the DOJ/FBI interview of Hillary Clinton were ‘inappropriate’ and created appearance of bias

 

  • The draft statement exonerating Clinton also removed the term “gross negligence”—a condition that could have been used for prosecution—and replaced with “especially concerning.” – Comey usurped the authority of the attorney general when he announced during a July 2016 press conference that the FBI would not be recommending charges against Clinton, then the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

 

  • An initial assessment in the Comey draft statement saying foreign spy services were “reasonably likely” to have accessed the classified data on the Clinton server was replaced with “possible.”

 

  • FBI ethics officials “did not fully appreciate” the potential conflict of interest by former FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s wife receiving $675,288 in 2015 from Clinton associate Terry McAuliffe, then-governor of Virginia, for her political campaign for a state senate seat. McCabe became head of the email probe in early 2016.

 

  • The FBI improperly regarded a parallel investigation of Russian collusion with the Trump presidential campaign in 2016 to be more important the Clinton email probe.

 

  • New texts between FBI lovers Strzok and Page were ‘disappointing’ and cast a shadow over the integrity of the entire Clinton email probe – Strzok’s and Page’s text messages expressing pro-Clinton and anti-Trump views raised questions about whether they allowed their political leanings to interfere with their work. – The senior FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page may have had a “willingness to take official action” to hurt Donald Trump’s chances of winning the 2016 election.

 

 

  • Five unnamed FBI employees — including one lawyer who later worked on the Mueller probe — are under scrutiny for anti-Trump bias

 

  • President Obama was one of the 13 individuals with whom Hillary Clinton had direct contact using her clintonemail.com account

 

  • Despite Clinton connections, former Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik and former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe didn’t fully recuse themselves 

 

  • ‘Insubordinate’ Ex-FBI Director James Comey repeatedly violated policy and inaccurately described the legal situation surrounding Clinton’s emails – While Comey’s conduct was “insubordinate,” his actions and those of others in the FBI were not affected by bias.

 

  • Comey departed “clearly and dramatically” from FBI and DOJ guidelines while overseeing the Clinton investigation. Comey’s decisions “negatively impacted the perception of the FBI” and the DOJ.

 

 

These points are hardly exhaustive, but they provide a decent snapshot of political bias even though the Horowitz IG Report erroneously claims no political bias affected the FBI/DOJ investigation of the Crooked Hillary illegal private email server.

 

I don’t know if you noticed. The Horowitz IG Report sounds an awful lot just Comey going down a list of Crooked Hillary practices that any two-bit lawyer could match to U.S. Statutes violated. Violations that have had criminal prosecutions!

 

I will cross post some of Conservative sources I felt aligned more with my thoughts, but first here are a few titles that I perused through.

 

NEW STRZOK TEXT: ‘WE’LL STOP’ TRUMP FROM WINNING

IG report finds Comey ‘insubordinate’ in Hillary probe; By Art Moore; WND; 6/14/18

 

IG REFERS 5 FBI EMPLOYEES OVER ‘HOSTILE’ MESSAGES

‘F— Trump,’ candidate’s supporters ‘retarded’; By ART MOORE; WND; 6/14/18

 

‘WILLINGNESS’ TO IMPACT THE ELECTION: IG’S CLINTON REPORT IS LOADED WITH BOMBSHELLS; By Peter Hasson; The Daily Caller; 06/14/2018 6:16 PM

 

‘A Cloud’: 4 Top Takeaways of Watchdog Report on FBI’s Clinton Email Probe; By Fred Lucas; Daily Signal; June 14, 2018

 

Justice Department IG Reveals FBI Corruption Senior FBI agent threatened to prevent Trump election in text message; agents took gifts from reporters; By Bill Gertz; Washington Free Beacon; 6/14/18 5:02 pm

 

JRH 6/15/18

Please Support NCCR

*********************

HUGE BREAKING NEWS: Another Lawyer Was Removed From Mueller’s Team This February Over Anti-Trump Text Messages

 

By Cristina Laila

June 14, 2018

Gateway Pundit

 

The IG report released Thursday revealed ANOTHER lawyer was removed from Mueller’s team of liberal hacks February of this year after anti-Trump text messages surfaced.

 

‘Viva Le Resistance,’ said the unidentified Trump-hating (future) Mueller lawyer in a November 2016 text message.

 

Chuck Ross of the Daily Caller reported:

 

An FBI attorney who worked on the special counsel’s Russia investigation until earlier this year sent anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, including one exclaiming: “Viva le Resistance.”

 

The attorney’s comments are revealed in a Justice Department inspector general’s report released on Thursday.

 

The lawyer is not identified, but he worked on the Hillary Clinton email investigation and was the FBI’s lead attorney on the investigation into Russian election interference. He was assigned to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation soon after it began in May 2017 and left in late February of this year after some of his private messages were shared with the special counsel.

 

The unidentified FBI lawyer said he was “numb” just days after Trump was elected to the White House.

 

Apparently the FBI lawyer became galvanized in his effort to resist Trump, reported Chuck Ross:

 

“Is it making you rethink your commitment to the Trump administration?” one FBI lawyer wrote on Nov. 22, 2016.

 

“Hell no. Viva le resistance,” the future Mueller attorney responded.

 

According to the report, this Trump-hating FBI lawyer claimed in an interview with the Office of Inspector General he didn’t let his political feelings or beliefs impact his work on Hillary’s email investigation or the Russia probe.

 

RIGHT.

 

And Horowitz said there was no political bias at the FBI…

+++++++++++++++++++++

CNN: Strzok and Page Didn’t Attack Trump, HE Attacked Them!

 

Biggest takeaway from IG report: With all odds stacked against him by a crazed, frenzied mainstream/social media, Hollywood/Entertainment, Never Trumpers, backstabbers in his own party, an Obama-weaponized FBI, Trump was elected President

 

By Judi McLeod 

June 15, 2018

Canada Free Press

 

Deep State & White House

 

“We’ll stop it.”  Three now infamous little words that can never be walked back and ones that prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the media of the day and a rogue Obama-weaponized FBI were on the same choir page during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

 

How the mighty are falling like dominoes before the very eyes of the masses—in spite of intense media backup.  The same masses that Hillary Rodham Clinton called “deplorables”  and that some unidentified FBI yob described as “mostly poor and middleclass”  members of society who voted Donald Trump.

 

“All the people who were initially voting for her would not, and were not, swayed by any decision the FBI put out,” the employee wrote. “Trump’s supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS (sic) that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing. They probably didn’t watch the debates, aren’t fully educated on his policies, and are stupidly wrapped up in his unmerited enthusiasm.” (Fox News, June 14. 2018)

 

All Obama’s voters were ever after, Mr. Yob, were kitchens, welfare for life and Obama phones.

 

“Despite Strzok’s extremely inappropriate texting — it’s wildly improper for someone in his position to express animus or favoritism toward a particular candidate — the inspector general found no evidence that Strzok acted on his text to Page.” (CNN, JUNE 14, 2018.)

 

No acting on his text other than turning the political world upside down, inside out and on its head.

 

VIDEO – Mark Levin: Not a single pro-Trump FBI agent in IG report

 

[Posted by Fox News

Published on Jun 14, 2018]

 

The biggest three little words, which came in August 2016 from disgraced FBI agent, Peter Strzok, once deputy head of counterintelligence at the FBI, working on both the Trump-Russia probe and the ‘investigation’ into Hillary Clinton’s private email server, were referenced in yesterday’s massively toned down, 500-page IG report, but the biggest laugh comes a day later from Fake News Grand Central CNN:

 

“The massive report from Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz makes clear that while several FBI officials broke with bureau protocol in their handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server during the 2016 campaign, they were not motivated by political bias against Donald Trump.” (CNN)

 

ONLY “several FBI officials “broke with bureau protocol” in their handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.  And they “WERE NOT” motivated by political bias against Donald Trump.”

 

Take THAT, President Trump, you paranoid, “not-MY-president, you!

The biggest reaction to the questionable IG report didn’t come from the public, media-teased for weeks before its final inelegant release—but from the media—shown as working for the same goals as Strzok and his mistress Lisa Page.

 

Unforgettable LOLs for today’s CNN headline: ‘How 7 words in the 500-page IG report give Donald Trump all the ‘deep state’ ammo he wanted’.

 

Trump had his Deep State ammo from the get-go.  Video proof exists in the hysterics, wailing and weeping of the networks’ talking heads in the wee hours of Nov. 9, 2016.

 

In their unprofessional, desperate lovers’ texts, Strzok and Page were only putting into words the collective fervent wishes of the mainstream and social media.

 

Evidence of the ill will the pair bore for Donald Trump:

 

PAGE: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
STRZOK: “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”

 

“Even before the release of these new text messages between Page and Strzok, who were having an extramarital affair during the campaign, Trump has focused on the duo as aligned against him. (CNN)

 

“SPYGATE is in full force! Is the Mainstream Media interested yet? Big stuff!” (There’s no evidence that Strzok, Page or the broader FBI were spying on Trump’s campaign.)

 

No, they were only trying to dump it.

 

And this is richest of all: “Trump has attacked the two since, at least last December, when emails and text between Strzok and Page were released, showing that both were skeptical of Trump. (Strzok was dismissed from the special counsel probe being run by Robert Mueller in summer 2017.)

 

This meme advances the outrageous lie that Trump was “attacking” Strzok and Page, rather than them attacking him.

 

Nor was Strzok merely dismissed from the special counsel being run by Robert Mueller in the summer of 2017, he was demoted and will some day be handsomely pensioned off.

 

Page left the scene returning to the same kind of obscurity she had before becoming FBI agent Strzok’s mistress.

 

The media will be falling over backwards to keep the masses from thinking about the report’s real biggest takeaway:

 

The biggest takeaway from the IG report is this: With all odds stacked against him by a crazed and frenzied mainstream/social media, Hollywood/Entertainment Industry, Never Trumpers, backstabbers in his own party and an Obama-weaponized FBI, etc., etc., etc, Donald Trump was handily elected as President of the United States.

+++++++++++++++++

Strassel: ‘Don’t believe anyone who tells you Horowitz didn’t find bias. I can still hear the echoes of the howls…’

 

By Tom Tillison 

June 15, 2018

BizPac Review

 

Wall Street Journal opinion columnist Kimberley Strassel took to Twitter to say what many Americans are thinking about Thursday’s release of the Department of Justice inspector general’s report, that something’s amiss because what’s in the report does not match the summary of the report.

 

In a series of tweets, Strassel began by noting the careful play on words by inspector general Michael Horowitz when he stressed that they “did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed.”

 

“Don’t believe anyone who claims Horowitz didn’t find bias,” she tweeted. “He very carefully says that he found no ‘documentary’ evidence that bias produced ‘specific investigatory decisions.”

 

Strassel notes that while no one actually put it in writing that they were politically motivated, Horowitz “in fact finds bias everywhere.”

 

And that “this same cast of characters who the IG has now found to have made a hash of the Clinton investigation” is now to be trusted working the Trump-Russia probe.

 

She also highlighted “stunning examples of incompetence,” such as former FBI director James Comey explaining that he didn’t grasp the importance of Anthony Weiner’s laptop because he wasn’t aware of Weiner being married to Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin.

 

 

And people dared to question President Donald Trump’s decision to fire Comey?

 

One thing is certain, the wording of the report allowed the anti-Trump media to run with headlines screaming that the IG report “found no political bias.”

 

But there’s a theory on what that was all about, as seen in a tweet from social media account The Last Refuge — that also happens to support the idea that the summary, “written post facto by administrators in FBI/DOJ leadership,” fails to correspond with what’s in the report.

 

“The ‘executive summary’ was written to protect the institutions and that’s where the media are getting ALL of their headlines,” the tweet reads. “However, the internal body, the investigative report inside, is entirely contradictory to the summary. The facts are DEVASTATING.”

 

Others commented, saying that Horowitz “pulled his punch just like Comey did with Hillary [Clinton].”

 

“I see some really damning stuff in this IG report,” tweeted social media user Brian Wilson. “But I’ll just go ahead and say it: The IG pulled his punch just like Comey did with Hillary. I’m stunned by the gathered evidence of bias … and shocked the IG doesn’t think the bias impacted the investigation.”

 

 

The liberal media has been quick to dismiss the IG’s findings, but as former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino noted, the report is “devastating.”

 

“The IG report is only a ‘nothing-burger’ to people who know nothing about the case. It’s a devastating report which will damage Obama, Comey, Hillary, Page, Strzok, and more. Read it and you’ll clearly see the troubling pieces of it,” he tweeted.

_______________________

No Overall Bias?

OIG Pulls a Comey in Horowitz Report

 

John R. Houk

© June 15, 2018

_____________________

HUGE BREAKING NEWS: Another Lawyer Was Removed From Mueller’s Team This February Over Anti-Trump Text Messages

 

© 2018 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

______________________

CNN: Strzok and Page Didn’t Attack Trump, HE Attacked Them!

 

Content is Copyright 1997-2018 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2018 Canada Free Press.Com 

_________________________

Strassel: ‘Don’t believe anyone who tells you Horowitz didn’t find bias. I can still hear the echoes of the howls…’

 

Copyright © 2018. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

 

Tinker, Tailor, Clapper, Carter, Downer, Halper, Spy


In this Jewish World Review post, Mark Steyn relates the obvious to readers: There was indeed interference in the 2016 election cycle, BUT it was not Donald Trump colluding with Russians. Rather it was the Dems and their Deep State comrades in the Obama Administration pulling out ALL efforts to make Trump was not elected. OR if elected, to undermine President Trump so malignantly, he’d get impeached or resign.

 

JRH 5/28/18

Please Support NCCR

**************************

Tinker, Tailor, Clapper, Carter, Downer, Halper, Spy

 

By Mark Steyn

May 28,2018

Jerusalem World Review

 

Facts – Myths

 

As I think most persons paying attention now realize, the investigation into foreign interference with the 2016 election was created as a cover for domestic interference with the 2016 election.

 

It was run at the highest (or deepest) Deep State levels by the likes of James Clapper and John Brennan, whose frantic and hysterical Tweets are like no utterances of any CIA director in history. That also explains one of the puzzling aspects of the last year that I’ve occasionally mentioned here and on TV and radio: If you were truly interested in an “independent” Special Counsel, why would you appoint Robert Mueller? He’s a lifetime insider and the most connected man in Washington – a longtime FBI Director, and Assistant Attorney-General and acting Deputy Attorney-General at the Department of Justice.

 

Exactly. His most obvious defect as an “independent” counsel is, in fact, his principal value to the likes of Andrew McCabe and Rod Rosenstein: He knows, personally, almost every one in the tight little coterie of discredited upper-echelon officials, and he has a deep institutional loyalty to bodies whose contemporary character he helped create. In other words, he’s the perfect guy to protect those institutions. As for the nominal subject of his investigation, well, he’s indicted a bunch of no-name Russian internet trolls who’ll never set foot in a US courthouse. That’s not even worth the cost of printing the complaint. Rush Limbaugh has been kind enough to quote, several times, my line that “there are no Russians in the Russia investigation”. Which is true. Yet that doesn’t mean there aren’t foreigners. And an inordinate number of them are British subjects – or, to use today’s preferred term, “Commonwealth citizens”. All the action in this case takes place not in Moscow but in southern England.

 

Let’s start at Cambridge University with a two-day conference called “2016’s Race to Change the World“, held on July 11th and 12th 2016 – or three weeks before the FBI supposedly began its “counterintelligence” operation against Trump, codenamed “Crossfire Hurricane”. That’s from the first line of the Rolling Stones’ “Jumpin’ Jack Flash”. The song and its key signature figure in the plot of a ho-hum Cold War thriller of the same name, about a British spy trying to get info from the Russians to an [sic] heroic American woman.

 

Yes, really. Jonathan Pryce played “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” , and I asked him about it when I moderated a panel on acting at St Catherine’s College, Oxford with him and Patti Lupone a few years later.

 

If you think that’s a weird event for an Oxbridge college to host, it’s as nothing to this “Race to Change the World” beano. I do my share of international junketing, but the bill of fare for this curious symposium is so bland as to be almost generic – panels titled “Europe and America”, “2016 and the World”, “Global Challenges Facing the Next President”. Compared to the laser-like focus of a typical Cambridge confab (“A Westphalia for the Middle East?“), it’s almost as if someone were trying to create an event so anodyne and torpid no one would notice it. All that distinguished these colorless presentations was the undoubted eminence of the speakers: former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright; former UK Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind; and Sir Richard Dearlove, former C (that’s M, for 007 fans) at MI6. The conference appears to have been put together at a couple of weeks’ notice by Steven Schrage, former “Co-Chair of the G8’s Anti-Crime and Terrorism Group” and a well-connected man on the counterterrorism cocktail circuit: Here he is introducing Mitt Romney to the director of the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center, and here he is spending election night in the UK at a party with Scotland Yard elite counterterrorist types. Make of that what you will – it’s a somewhat odd background for the convenor of an insipid, vanilla, cookie-cutter foreign-policy seminar – but among the small number of strangely prestigious attendees at Mr Schrage’s conference were:

 

~Carter Page, a petroleum-industry executive and Trump campaign volunteer;

 

~Christopher Steele, the former head of the Russia house at MI6;

 

~Stefan Halper, a University of Cambridge professor with dual UK/US citizenship.

 

Today, Mr Page is better known as the endlessly surveilled “person of interest” whose eternally renewable FISA warrant was the FBI’s gateway into the Trump campaign; Mr Steele is a sometime FBI asset who, a week before the Cambridge conference, had approached the G-men with the now famous “dossier” that provided the pretext for the FISA application; and Professor Halper turns out to be not some tweedy academic but a man with deep connections to MI6 and the CIA, on the payroll of something at the Pentagon called the “Office of Net Assessment”, and (one of) the supposed FBI informant(s) inside the Trump circle.

 

Carter Page says that in the course of this two-day conference he met Professor Halper for the first time. But I was struck by this aside Mr Page made to Sara Carter:

 

Madeliene [sic] Albright was always trying to get me to go into public debates. I told her I was there just as a listener, just as an attendee.

 

Hmm. If you’ll forgive another Patti Lupone-type digression, many years ago our mutual pal Ned Sherrin decided to launch, just for a laugh, a rumor that me and Carol Thatcher (Mrs T’s daughter) were having an affair. Ned told somebody, and somebody told somebody else, and about eight months later it turned up as an item in Nigel Dempster’s highly authoritative Daily Mail gossip column, along with a rather goofy picture of me and Carol at a David Frost shindig at the Grosvenor House in Park Lane. And Ned was stunned – because he assumed the Daily Mail story was true. Because, by the time it circled back to him, he’d clean forgotten he’d started the whole business.

 

Oddly enough, that’s exactly how James Comey and Andrew McCabe and John Brennan work. At the FISA court, the FBI, to bolster their reliance on the Steele dossier, pointed to newspaper stories appearing to corroborate aspects of it – even though, as he subsequently testified under oath at the Old Bailey, those stories were in fact fed to those reporters by Steele himself. Nevertheless, it works like a charm on gullible FISA judges. You take one thing and you make it two things. Or even better, you take nothing and you make it a thing: Here, from yesterday’s letter by Senator Ron Johnson, are McCabe, Sally Yates and other FBI/DOJ honchos arranging for Comey to brief Trump on the Steele dossier for the sole purpose of giving CNN a news peg for leaking details about what’s in it.

 

It’s almost as if that’s what Madeleine Albright is doing here, isn’t it? It’s one thing to invite Carter Page to show up at some tedious yakfest at Cambridge with Halper sitting in front of him and Chris Steele sitting behind. But what if you could get Page to stand up and say something? Then you could find a friendly journo to report it and, instead of just a nobody on the fringes of the campaign, you’d have a “senior Trump advisor” sharing his thoughts on the global scene with Madam Albright and Sir Richard and Sir Malcolm and all the other bigshots, and then you could use that story three weeks later at the FISA court, to demonstrate how deep into the heart of the campaign the Russkies had penetrated.

 

Instead, Professor Halper has to make do with chit-chatting to Mr Page over the tea and biscuits, and planting the seeds for a friendly relationship.

 

Herewith a note on the academic circuit: emeritus professors and visiting fellows are popular covers with espionage agencies because there’s minimal work and extensive foreign travel, to international talking shops like the one above. If you make the mistake of being a multinational businessman and go to foreign countries to meet with other businessmen, you’ll be investigated up the wazoo. But, if you’re a professor and you go to foreign countries to meet with other professors, the world is your oyster. You also get to meet young people, who are the easiest to recruit.

 

Here’s another professor, and from another Commonwealth country: Malta. Joseph Mifsud is (was) a professorial fellow at the University of Stirling in Scotland, but is (was) based in London as a principal of the “London Centre of International Law Practice” and a director of the “London Academy of Diplomacy”, both of which sound fancy-schmancy but are essentially hollow entities operating from the same premises – 8, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, a tony address (next to the London School of Economics and the Royal College of Surgeons) but the “London Centre/Academy’s” fifth in three years and at which they and a handful of other endeavors are holed up in a minimally furnished back room filled by four interns round a trestle table on fifty quid a week.

 

Professor Mifsud also has (had) similarly undemanding academic sinecures at the “Euro-Mediterranean University” in Slovenia and “Link Campus University” in Italy. At the beginning of March 2016, a young man called George Papadopoulos joined the Trump campaign. On March 14th, traveling through Italy, he met with Professor Mifsud. They got together again in Britain, and at some point Papadopoulos became head of the “London Centre of International Law Practice’s” soi-disant “Centre for International Energy and Natural Resources Law & Security”, a post for which he had no obvious qualifications. Happily, like most other jobs at the “London Centre”, it didn’t require work, or showing up at the “London Centre” or even being in London.

 

Mifsud is said to have ties to high-ranking figures in Moscow, but there seems to be more prima facie evidence of ties to high-ranking figures in London. That’s Professor Mifsud above with my old friend Boris Johnson, Britain’s Foreign Secretary, at some Brexit event last October 19th. On October 31st Joseph Mifsud disappeared and has not been seen since. I know how he feels: The same thing happened to me twelve days after I lunched with Boris at The Spectator in early 2006. Is (was) Mifsud an FSB asset? An MI6 asset? Both? Neither? Well, there’s more circumstantial evidence of Mifsud’s ties to British intelligence, including multiple meetings with, inter alia, Claire Smith of the UK’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

 

At any rate, back in London on April 26th 2016, Professor Mifsud told young Papadopoulos that the Russians have all this “dirt” on Hillary, “thousands of emails”. A couple of days later, a friend of George’s at the Israeli Embassy, Christian Cantor, introduced him to Erika Thompson, who worked for Alexander Downer, Canberra’s High Commissioner in the UK, at Australia House. On May 4th, Papadopoulos was quoted in The Times of London denouncing David Cameron for calling Trump “divisive, stupid and wrong“. On May 6th, Ms Thompson called Papadopoulos to say that Mr Downer wanted to meet him. On May 10th they met for drinks at the Kensington Wine Rooms. Young George claims that the High Commissioner told him to “leave David Cameron alone”. Which doesn’t sound quite right to me.

 

As longtime readers may recall, I have drunk with Alexander Downer and that is not something to be undertaken lightly. Somewhere in the course of the evening a pretty squiffy Papadopoulos lifted his head up from the bowl of cocktail olives and started blabbing about Russian “dirt” on Hillary.

 

Another digression: Mr Downer was Australia’s longest serving foreign minister and, as I used to say in those days, “my favorite foreign minister”. Since then, he has spent many years on the “advisory board” of Hakluyt, a curiously named body set up by former MI6 chaps. I’m not saying he spends his nights rappelling down the walls of presidential palaces (although I would be tickled to be proved wrong), but I don’t think I’m betraying any confidences when I say that, after tea with Alexander in Adelaide a couple of years back, whence he had just returned from some meeting with some group or other in Lisbon, I remember musing about that select circle of people who can jet around the world in the expectation that doors will open for them and some useful tidbit will drop into their laps. As for Hakluyt, its website is here: I do believe it’s the coolest thing I’ve seen since (another long me-‘n’-Carol-type story) I was given Marlon Brando’s business card, which had the words “Marlon” and “Brando” on it and nothing else.

 

At any rate Mr Downer relayed the information about young George to Aussie Intelligence back home. Canberra sat on the info for two months and then passed it along to the Yanks in late July, just in time for that FISA application.

 

And so, as July turned to August, Peter Strzok bade farewell to his “paramour” Lisa Page and flew to London for a sit-down with the High Commissioner at Australia House. When Strzok reported back to Washington, the FBI sicced the omnipresent “professor” Stefan Halper on George Papadopoulos. So the Trump aide woke up one August morning to an email from a Cambridge academic he’d never heard of, inviting him on an all-expenses-paid trip back to Britain to give a speech for $3,000. Once in London, Halper casually inquired of his new friend, “George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?”

 

Right. As Rush put it, the day before I guest-hosted last week:

 

He was a nothing. He was a nobody, which made him a perfect mark. He was a young guy who wanted to go places… He actually put on his résumé that he had participated in Model UN in high school.

 

Just so: Papadopoulos was the perfect mark. And the easiest way to reel him in is to get him off his home turf. In your own neighborhood, you have your routine – your usual bars, favorite restaurants; you notice if something’s off. But, flown to London, you have no routine, no old haunts. You go where you’re invited, you’re introduced to important people – like “High Commissioners”, woshever the hell thash ish, hic – [Blog Editor: As an American I think Steyn is expressing a drunken form of “whoever the hell they is, hiccup] and you want them to think you’re important, too, so you reveal that you know all about the Russian “dirt” on Hillary.

 

So you got that from the Russians, right? Er, no. I got it from a Maltese guy in Italy who’s a Scottish professor and plugged in to MI6, and then I told it to an Australian bloke in London who’s also plugged in to MI6 and told me to lay off David Cameron, and then an American guy in Cambridge who’s plugged in to MI6 reminded me about it to see if I’d deny all knowledge of it, which would be suspicious, wouldn’t it..?

 

As I said, and as Rush likes to quote, there are no Russians in the Russia investigation. But, like that rumor about me and Carol Thatcher, you just put these things out there and a few months later they come back to you, via Canberra and the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing program and suddenly it’s “independently” “corroborated” “evidence” from a respected ally and you can take it to a FISA judge.

 

There were two investigations into presidential candidates during the 2016 election. But, as Andrew McCarthy reminds us, these two investigations were not the same. The Clinton “matter” was a criminal investigation – because there was credible evidence that Hillary had committed criminal acts. The FBI had no such clear-cut goods on Trump. So they had to find something else:

 

The scandal is that the FBI, lacking the incriminating evidence needed to justify opening a criminal investigation of the Trump campaign, decided to open a counterintelligence investigation. With the blessing of the Obama White House, they took the powers that enable our government to spy on foreign adversaries and used them to spy on Americans — Americans who just happened to be their political adversaries.

 

And the advantage of a “counterintelligence investigation”, unlike a criminal investigation, is that everything in it is “classified”. So that even an obvious set-up at a Cambridge confab or Kensington wine bar is “intelligence” that has to be “protected” for “national security” reasons. It’s a brazen, audacious scheme, and unlikely to have been loosed without the approval, however discreetly stated, of the then President. Occam’s Razor suggests that the man running the operation was the CIA’s John Brennan through the “inter-agency taskforce” that met at Langley. But Brennan isn’t that reckless: Go back to Madeleine Albright urging Carter Page to speak up at a Cambridge conference; Christopher Steele leaking parts of his dossier to the newspapers; a staffer at Australia House inviting George Papadopoulos for a drink… The best way to turn nothing into something is to plant it somewhere far away and wait for it to work its way back to you:

 

Britain’s spy agencies played a crucial role in alerting their counterparts in Washington to contacts between members of Donald Trump’s campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives, the Guardian has been told.

 

Golly, you don’t say! I wonder who “told” The Guardian that. A conference here, a speech there, a cocktail round the corner, and pretty soon you have the simulacrum of “counterintelligence” concerns from America’s closest allies:

 

According to one account, GCHQ’s then head, Robert Hannigan, passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan. The matter was deemed so sensitive it was handled at “director level”. After an initially slow start, Brennan used GCHQ information and intelligence from other partners to launch a major inter-agency investigation.

 

Er, wait a minute. If it’s “so sensitive” it’s being handled “director-to-director”, why isn’t the head of GCHQ meeting with his opposite number at NSA? Why’s he meeting with Brennan?

 

Hey, don’t get hung up on details. It all went brilliantly – except for one tiny detail: Hillary managed to do the impossible and lose. On January 23rd 2017, three days after Trump’s inauguration, GCHQ at Cheltenham Tweeted the sad fate of Mr So Sensitive:

 

We’re sorry to announce that Robert Hannigan, our Director since 2014, has decided to step down as head of GCHQ.

 

Oh, dear. Well, enjoy your sudden retirement, old boy. Unfortunately, for Brennan and Comey and McCabe and Strzok and the others on this side of the Atlantic in the third week of January, it wasn’t quite that simple. Because, instead of protecting Hillary, they were now protecting themselves – so it was necessary to dig in and double-down on the “Russia investigation”.

 

Which sounds super-credible except for one small point: there was never a Russia investigation. As Andrew McCarthy sums it up:

 

Opening up a counterintelligence investigation against Russia is not the same thing as opening up a counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign.

 

Which is what they did – Brennan and Clapper and Comey and McCabe. They took tools designed to combat America’s foreign enemies and used them against their own citizens and their political opposition. It was an intentional subversion of the electoral process conducted at the highest level by agencies with almost unlimited power. And, if they get away with it, they will do it again, and again and again. That’s what Brennan’s telling us on Twitter, and Clapper on “The View”:

 

Yeah? So what? Whatcha gonna do about it?

 

Good question.

________________________

Mark Steyn is an international bestselling author, a Top 41 recording artist, and a leading Canadian human rights activist. His latest book is “The Undocumented Mark Steyn: Don’t Say You Weren’t Warned“. (Buy it at a 57% discount by clicking here or order in KINDLE edition at a 41% discount by clicking hereSales help fund JWR)

 

© 2018 Mark Steyn Enterprises (US) Inc.

 

© 1997- 2018 Jewish World Review 

 

About JWR

 

JWR is a free magazine published five days a week on the World Wide Web of interest to people of faith and those interested in learning more about contemporary Judaism from Jews who take their religion seriously.

 

Our inaugural editorial is also our mission statement.

 

Readers, individuals wishing to submit an article on “spec,” or make a tax deductible donation and those seeking advertising rates may contact JWR by email or by calling (718) 972-9241. Please note that all correspondence with JWR remains our property and may be used accordingly.

 

READ THE REST

 

What! Obama FBI Spied on Trump Campaign


With TWO Spies?

John R. Houk, Editor

Posted May 22, 2018

 

Even as the Leftist Mainstream Media and Obama Deep State operatives spin an alternative story, only a fool or a lying spin doctor would not admit Obama inserted his political desires into the 2016 election cycle.

 

Here are two news articles discussing FBI spying.

 

JRH 5/22/18

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Hold On, The FBI Was Spying On The Trump Campaign *Before* The Counterintelligence Probe Officially Started?

 

By Matt Vespa

May 22, 2018 2:27 PM

Townhall

 

Donald Trump

 

Who is the FBI spy that was trying to glean information on the Trump campaign? Well, reportedly, it’s longtime CIA operative Stefan Halper. And no, it wasn’t leaked. If this is true, and most likely it is, there’s enough public information on him, along with the news media leaving a trail of breadcrumbs that confirmed his identity. They were as subtle as a sledgehammer.

 

Last week, it was reported that the FBI had spied on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. It was later revealed by Axios that Halper had tried to get a top-level job in the administration after the campaign. Yet, before we get into what The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald and others have noted about the timeline of the FBI’s Russia probe, let’s look real quick at the linguistic martial arts the news media is playing here. All of this deep state/Trump was spied on stuff was written off by the news media as conspiratorial garbage. Well, it turns out they were wrong. They’re wrong about everything it seems, especially reports covering this White House. This is how The New York Times covered this development. They also said that this spy is someone well known within D.C. circles.

 

President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign “for political purposes” even before the bureau had any inkling of the “phony Russia hoax.”

 

In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia.

 

[…]

 

F.B.I. agents were seeking more details about what Mr. Papadopoulos knew about the hacked Democratic emails, and one month after their Russia investigation began, Mr. Papadopoulos received a curious message. The academic inquired about his interest in writing a research paper on a disputed gas field in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, a subject of Mr. Papadopoulos’s expertise.

 

The informant offered a $3,000 honorarium for the paper and a paid trip to London, where the two could meet and discuss the research project.

 

“I understand that this is rather sudden but thought that given your expertise it might be of interest to you,” the informant wrote in a message to Mr. Papadopoulos, sent on Sept. 2, 2016.

 

Mr. Papadopoulos accepted the offer and arrived in London two weeks later, where he met for several days with the academic and one of his assistants, a young woman.

 

Over drinks and dinner one evening at a high-end London hotel, the F.B.I. informant raised the subject of the hacked Democratic National Committee emails that had spilled into public view earlier that summer, according to a person familiar with the conversation. The source noted how helpful they had been to the Trump campaign, and asked Mr. Papadopoulos whether he knew anything about Russian attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election.

 

Yeah, how is that not spying? It is. And this is the problem with liberalism as of late; they’ve wantonly decided to ignore the definition of what words mean. Spying is now informing. Invasions are now called “uncontested arrivals,” but back to Mr. Halper and the timeline. It seems that his alleged information gathering operation started way before his rendezvous with Papadopoulos. Carter Page and Sam Clovis, two others affiliated with the Trump team, were also approached by Halper as well.

 

Greenwald noted that Halper has history with this sort of operation; he reportedly did something similar to Carter’s 1980 re-election campaign. Halper with some other former intelligence operatives allegedly funneled information on then-President Carter’s foreign policy to Republican candidate, and future president, Ronald Reagan. This was all revealed in 1983.

 

 

Greenwald also noted that while the news media knew who the FBI spy was, they refused to reveal his name, though they left so many clues that they might as well have disclosed the source. He also adds that the FBI and members of Congress are being more or less absurd that revealing the source would be damaging to national security; we pretty much already know who it is. And his work was already been reported. The Intercept then details how the Daily Caller was able to discern whom the source was using entirely public information, which brings us to FBI timeline. When did this investigation begin because it seems there were other times that Halper reached out to Trump team members prior to the Papadopoulos meeting that supposedly led to the FBI opening up a counterintelligence investigation in July of 2016. By the way, this theory was published by the Times in December of 2017, and it was ripped apart.

 

Via Intercept:

 

…the New York Times reported in December of last year that the FBI investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia began when George Papadopoulos drunkenly boasted to an Australian diplomat about Russian dirt on Hillary Clinton. It was the disclosure of this episode by the Australians that “led the F.B.I. to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump’s associates conspired,” the NYT claimed.

 

But it now seems clear that Halper’s attempts to gather information for the FBI began before that. “The professor’s interactions with Trump advisers began a few weeks before the opening of the investigation, when Page met the professor at the British symposium,” the Post reported. While it’s not rare for the FBI to gather information before formally opening an investigation, Halper’s earlier snooping does call into question the accuracy of the NYT’s claim that it was the drunken Papadopoulos ramblings that first prompted the FBI’s interest in these possible connections. And it suggests that CIA operatives, apparently working with at least some factions within the FBI, were trying to gather information about the Trump campaign earlier than had been previously reported.

 

Then there are questions about what appear to be some fairly substantial government payments to Halper throughout 2016. Halper continues to be listed as a “vendor” by websites that track payments by the federal government to private contractors.

 

[…]

 

Equally strange are the semantic games which journalists are playing in order to claim that this revelation disproves, rather than proves, Trump’s allegation that the FBI “spied” on his campaign.

 

So, there’s the new line of inquiry. The FBI spy was investigating something prior to the official start of the counterintelligence probe. Byron York’s column in The Washington Examiner noted that Trump March meeting with The Washington Post editorial board is where the FBI and DOJ probably got the first batch of names to peruse; Trump has announced that Papadopoulos and Carter Page would be lending a hand:

 

Trump’s announcement did not go unnoticed at the FBI and Justice Department. The bureau knew Page from a previous episode in which Russian agents had tried, unsuccessfully, to recruit him. It’s not clear what the FBI knew about the others. But then-Director James Comey and number-two Andrew McCabe personally briefed Attorney General Loretta Lynch on the list of newly-named Trump foreign policy advisers, including Page, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

 

Lynch told the House Intelligence Committee that she, Comey, and McCabe discussed whether to provide a “defensive briefing” to the Trump campaign. That would entail having an FBI official meet with a senior campaign official “to alert them to the fact that … there may be efforts to compromise someone with their campaign,” Lynch said.

 

It didn’t happen, even though it was discussed again when Comey briefed the National Security Council principals committee about Page in the “late spring” of 2016, according to Lynch’s testimony. (The principals committee includes some of the highest-ranking officials in the government, including the secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, and Homeland Security, the attorney general, the head of the CIA, the White House chief of staff, U.N. ambassador, and more.)

 

So the nation’s top political appointees, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies were watching Trump campaign figures in the spring and early summer of 2016.

 

And all of this brings us to a figure that has remained under the radar in all of this: President Barack Obama. What did he know and when did he know it because the intelligence apparatus of the U.S. was under his administration, along with the FBI/DOJ. It’s relevant to bring the former president and his team under the microscope again. Until then, what we know via Larry O’Connor is that a) the Trump campaign was spied on; and b) the motive was political pending new developments:

 

First, let’s hope that all Americans, Left, Right and Never Trump, can agree that this operation was unprecedented and extraordinary. The FBI has never, as far as we know, conducted a clandestine investigation on a presidential campaign complete with electronic surveillance and a spy. The bar to initiate such an investigation would have to be pretty high. The FBI would not, under normal circumstances, authorize this kind of operation unless there was extreme and justifiable reasons to do so.

 

So, whatever the reason to initiate this operation, one expects that reason to be pretty concrete and conclusive.

 

Now, let’s examine the underlying political atmosphere surrounding the decision to launch this extraordinary, unprecedented investigation.

 

Donald Trump was President Obama’s political enemy. He was running, specifically, to undo Obama’s legacy and everything he had instituted through executive actions. He was also running against Obama’s chosen successor.

 

[…]

 

We know that the atmosphere surrounding the decision to launch the investigation was highly political. It was political in the most personal sense for President Obama, who held the reigns [sic] of power over the FBI and the DOJ at the time of the investigation.

 

We know that the political document known as the “Steele dossier” was used, at least in part, to justify many elements of the spying operation against the Trump campaign.

 

We know that George Popadopoulos’ statement in a bar with an Austrailian [sic] diplomat triggered some element of the investigation as well.

 

A guy making a statement in a bar and a pile of unverified opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign doesn’t even come close to the very high bar needed to be cleared to initiate a clandestine investigation on any American citizen, let alone a member of a presidential campaign just weeks before election day.

 

But, it appears, that’s all we have

 

[…]

 

Given the politically charged backdrop of the Obama versus Trump death match, coupled with the use of the Steele dossier (by definition a political document paid for by Trump’s political opponent) the only reasonable conclusion to reach is that the FBI spying operation was launched for political purposes.

 

And now the wait begins—and it could take years.

++++++++++++++++++

Ex-Trump Aide Comes Forward… Says There’s Second Spy, Second Intel Agency

 

BY CILLIAN ZEAL
MAY 22, 2018 AT 7:27AM

Conservative Tribune by WJ

 

Michael Cavuto on Fox News – Screen Capture of CT Video

 

One of President Donald Trump’s most explosive claims about the 2016 election — one that was dismissed out of hand until recently — was that his campaign was the subject of extensive surveillance.

 

Now, a former Trump aide is saying something even more explosive: There wasn’t just a mole inside the Trump campaign, there was a second spy and intelligence agency.

 

Michael Caputo is pretty much the definition of a political lifer. A media strategist, he worked with Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and various other Republicans. After the fall of the Soviet Union, he began doing work with the Russians.

 

This didn’t get the attention of too many people until he started working for Trump. Much like Carter Page, the low-level Trump campaign staffer whose ties to Russia became the subject of a million conspiracy theories, Caputo’s ties to the Russians became of intense interest to the overzealous FBI people charged with finding some sort of evidence that Trump was the Siberian Candidate.

 

Caputo appeared on Fox News just hours after Axios reported “President Trump’s top trade adviser, Peter Navarro, recommended appointing Stefan Halper, an academic and suspected FBI informant on the Trump campaign, to a senior role in the Trump administration.”

 

That’s bad. According to Caputo, things were even worse.

 

“Let me tell you something that I know for a fact, this informant, this person that they planted, that they tried to plant into the campaign and even into the administration, if you believe Axios — he’s not the only person that came into the campaign!” Caputo said.

 

“And the FBI is not the only Obama agency who came into the campaign,” he added.

 

“I know because they came at me. And I’m looking for clearance from my attorney to reveal this to the public. This is just the beginning and I’ll tell you, when we finally find out the truth about this, Director Clapper and the rest of them are gonna be wearing some orange suits.”

 

Orange suits are an unlikely outcome, but Caputo’s statement indicates that Obama-era surveillance of the Trump campaign — once dismissed as tinfoil-hattery — might actually be very real.

 

Of course, Caputo may have a reason to prevaricate about such things. Kimberley Strassel doesn’t. She’s the Wall Street Journal writer whose reporting has indicated that she believes there was an FBI mole inside the campaign.

 

“The Bureau already has some explaining to do. Thanks to the Washington Post’s unnamed law-enforcement leakers, we know Mr. Nunes’s request deals with a ‘top secret intelligence source’ of the FBI and CIA, who is a U.S. citizen and who was involved in the Russia collusion probe,” she wrote in an article earlier this month.

 

“When government agencies refer to sources, they mean people who appear to be average citizens but use their profession or contacts to spy for the agency. Ergo, we might take this to mean that the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign.

 

“This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting,” she added. “It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough.”

 

During and after the campaign, Trump’s claims that he was surveilled (and that the surveillance was politically-motivated) were dismissed as baseless fantasies, yet another sign this was an unbalanced person who shouldn’t be normalized or believed.

 

And yet, here we are, weeks away from the inspector general’s report on the Clinton investigation, which doesn’t sound like it’s going to simply be the pro forma postmortem it normally would be, considering it involved a losing campaign. The report is expected to detail a whole host of tactics by the “deep state” that could easily be construed as being in service of the Clinton campaign and to the detriment of the Trump campaign.

 

If Caputo is telling the truth, this means there’s a whole host of issues here. Who was involved? The DOJ and FBI, obviously, but the CIA too? Other agencies under the aegis of the ODNI?

 

I can predict just one thing: Things are about to get very interesting for everyone who called Trump crazy when he talked about surveillance.

 

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

____________________

Hold On, The FBI Was Spying On The Trump Campaign *Before* The Counterintelligence Probe Officially Started?

 

Townhall.com is the leading source for conservative news and political commentary and analysis.


Copyright © Townhall.com. All Rights Reserved.

_______________________

Ex-Trump Aide Comes Forward… Says There’s Second Spy, Second Intel Agency

 

Conservative Tribune by WJ homepage