A story published by the New York Times confirmed on Wednesday that the FBI ran a spy operation on the Trump campaign that involved government informants, secret subpoenas, and possible wiretaps.
Does anyone believe this didn’t come down from former president Barack Obama? Are we supposed to believe that an operation such as spying on a presidential candidate was the act of career professionals who all went rogue at the same time?
The Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general has a report coming out on the FBI’s corrupt actions taken during the 2016 election. The story is more than likely an attempt of the corrupt people involved to dilute the findings of the IG report ahead of its release. This is what liberals do all the time. When they are about to be exposed they try to downplay it as much as possible so that their useful idiots will repeat their talking points among the public. Either that or they Steinwall forever and when they are finally forced to hand over evidence the same useful idiots claim it’s old news and no longer relevant.
Imagine how bad the report must be when the story revealed that the supposedly apolitical FBI was spying on the Trump campaign via phone records and with at least one person posing as a Trump campaign worker. That is some Soviet Union type stuff. The contents of the story, not the NY Times. But then again…
“The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said. And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos,” the Times reported, citing “current and former officials.”
The revelation of “at least one government informant” appears to confirm a Washington Post story last week in which leakers revealed that the FBI had a “top secret intelligence source” — a U.S. citizen who likely lived overseas — who had spied on members of the Trump campaign for the FBI.
The Post came out with the report at the same time House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) was fighting the DOJ for information on the source.
The Wall Street Journal‘s Kimberley Strassel reported that the source meant “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,” Strassel wrote in a piece last Thursday.
The Times’ story is a revelation in itself as it conflicts with what we have already been told by the FBI, that the investigation into the Trump campaign supposedly started because of information gathered from Papadopoulos, who ran his mouth at a pub to an Australian diplomat that he knew that Russians had stolen emails that would be embarrassing for Hillary Clinton.
However, the leakers told the Times that it was “within hours” of starting the investigation on the Trump campaign July 31, 2016, two FBI agents were sent to London to interview the Australian who talked to Papadopoulos. That means the FBI had opened their investigation before they talked to the diplomat in London. This screws up the FBI’s timeline they previously gave.
Agents summarized the interview two days after the investigation began and sent the summary back to Washington, apparently breaking with diplomatic protocol. That shows how eager they were to attack Trump.
The Times, ever on the wrong side of truth and honor, tried to dilute this point by saying that the report “helped provide the foundation” for the case, while the FBI, until now, said it sparked the case.
There is no other way to see this than these facts confirm that the FBI had already opened the investigation on the Trump campaign based on some other information or by a corrupt administration that wanted to ensure that Donald Trump did not win the presidency.
The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway, who has reported on the FBI’s investigation in depth, called the Times’ report “an attempted whitewash” of FBI behavior.
The Times quoted Strzok as texting Page with, “I cannot believe we are seriously looking at these allegations and the pervasive connections.” In reality, he had texted Page “OMG I CANNOT BELIEVE WE ARE SERIOUSLY LOOKING AT THESE ALLEGATIONS AND THE PERVASIVE CONNECTIONS.”
It is common knowledge that APP CAPS when texting means excitement, anger, or some other such emotion is being expressed, yet the Times tried to downplay it. This was done on purpose and we cannot imagine the Times doing the same to an ALL CAPS text that would embarrass a conservative.
It’s an embarrassment of an article. The @nytimes should be ashamed to be stenographers for biased FBI and DOJ officials
NYT: Strzok writes a message in sentence case, with calm, detached air implied
REALITY: “OMG” and the entire message in excited ALL CAPS pic.twitter.com/3AJGicwdjs
— Undercover Huber (@JohnWHuber) May 16, 2018
“Crossfire Hurricane” was the code name for the investigation on the Trump campaign as revealed in the story.
The story states that Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn was about to be cleared in November 2016, while there was no evidence of collusion during the campaign.
The story states, “A year and a half later, no public evidence has surfaced connecting Mr. Trump’s advisers to the hacking or linking Mr. Trump himself to the Russian government’s disruptive efforts,” after stating “The question they confronted still persists: Was anyone in the Trump campaign tied to Russian efforts to undermine the election?”
Another part of the story shows former CIA Director John Brennan taking an active role in pushing the investigation along.
By mid-August, Brennan shared intelligence with Comey showing that the Russian government was behind an attack on the election. It states he also briefed top lawmakers that summer about Russian election interference and intelligence that Moscow supported the Trump campaign.
Other reports showed that Brennan sent a letter to then Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), who in turn urged James Comey, the FBI Director at the time, to investigate the Trump campaign even though an FBI investigation had already been opened.
A separate report on Wednesday published by the American Spectator’s George Neumayr said that leaked stories in the British press showed that it was April 2016 when Brennan’s spying on Trump began.
“As it became urgently clear to Brennan that Trump was going to face off against Hillary, Brennan turned to ‘intelligence partners’ in Europe for dirt on Trump. But they didn’t have any, save some pretty skimpy material on ‘contacts’ between Trump campaign officials and Russians,” he writes. He continues:
From April 2016 to July 2016, according to leaked stories in the British press, he assembled a multi-agency task force that served as the beginnings of a counterintelligence probe into the Trump campaign. During these months, he was ‘personally briefing’ Obama on ‘Russian interference’ — Brennan’s euphemism for spying on the Trump campaign — and was practically camped out at the White House. So in all likelihood Obama knew about and had given his blessing to Brennan’s dirt-digging.
According to the Times, “intelligence agencies began collaborating to investigate” the Russian government attack on the election, which involved the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team. This corroborates that task force.