The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread

Did the FBI have a spy in the Trump campaign?
Ed Morrissey May 11, 2018 8:41 AM
RodRosenstein.jpg

Checks and balances.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
That was my point, you either ignore it or are oblivious to her point . . . same point that has been made by minorities and women. At what point in history do you say we dial back to?
Click to expand...

Rodent....Did you finish HS....
You sure as hell didn't attend College....
You don't even come close to JC level critical thinking skills....

Maybe in the Future present your case with a
simple Premise/Body and Conclusion....

Donate any extra cash you have to the :

" Save Micheal Avenatti from Himself " fund........
 
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. 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. It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough.


Strassel also notes that the timeline of events is critical because the FBI has insisted that a tip in July 2016 from a Clinton-connected Australian diplomat on Trump campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos is what led to its counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign.

Strassel continues by noting the different stonewalling tactics the DOJ has used to prevent the information from coming out "strongly suggests that whatever is in these files is going to prove very uncomfortable to the FBI."

Strassel's analysis falls in line with comments made this week by CNN law enforcement analyst and retired FBI supervisory special agent James A. Gagliano.




James A. Gagliano

✔@JamesAGagliano

Sources with knowledge of the impending DOJ Inspector General Report confirm that it will be a fairly damning indictment of FBI's seventh floor during the Comey era.

"It's worse than expected," seems to be the consistent theme ...

10:50 AM - May 9, 2018
 
Hüsker Dü said:
Trump lets drug companies off the hook


Drugmaker stocks rose handsomely the day President Trump outlined his new plan for bringing down drug prices–which means Wall Street doesn’t think his plan will work.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-lets-drug-companies-off-hook-194250576.html
Click to expand...

So why is Cryin Chuck Schumer pissin an spittin all over the House floor
at 7:30 am every morning the Senate is in session....He's another freakin
loose cannon that needs to hit the high country and nibble on oats and
prairie grass.......
 
The 'Election Collusion' Was between Our Intelligence Community and Britain
By Clarice Feldman
As I will explain, the widespread notion that Russia and Trump colluded to beat Hillary has long been demonstrable bunk. What seems more clear each day is that there was collusion between certain members of the U.S. and British intelligence communities to spy on the Trump campaign. This may explain, in large part, the reluctance of the Department of Justice to reveal what it knows publicly. After all -- with rare exceptions -- the two countries’ intelligence services have long had important information gathering and sharing agreements, and exposure of this may harm the traditional reciprocal relationship.

Congressman Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has been stonewalled by the Department of Justice respecting the details of the originating Electronic Communication (EC) on July 31, 2016, which formed the basis of the commencement of the FBI counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign. In particular, he wanted to know the identity of the person whose name had been redacted on what has been described as an FBI/DOJ source “a U.S. Citizen who has provided intelligence to the CIA and FBI”. The DOJ replied that revealing the source “might damage international relationships.” Failing to get a response, Nunes threatened to hold the attorney general in contempt of Congress and the DoJ offered a private meeting. At this meeting they were denied an opportunity to view the relevant documents, but Greg Jarrett reports they will get to see them next week:



At about the time the meeting took place, Kimberley Strassel of the Wall Street Journal dropped a bombshell, making public what we long suspected.

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. 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. It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough. (snip)

And to the point, when precisely was this human source operating? Because if it was prior to that infamous Papadopoulos tip, then the FBI isn’t being straight. It would mean the bureau was spying on the Trump campaign prior to that moment. And that in turn would mean that the FBI had been spurred to act on the basis of something other than a junior campaign aide’s loose lips.

We also know that among the Justice Department’s stated reasons for not complying with the Nunes subpoena was its worry that to do so might damage international relationships. This suggests the “source” may be overseas, have ties to foreign intelligence, or both. That’s notable, given the highly suspicious role foreigners have played in this escapade. It was an Australian diplomat who reported the Papadopoulos conversation. Dossier author Christopher Steele is British, used to work for MI6, and retains ties to that spy agency as well as to a network of former spooks. It was a former British diplomat who tipped off Sen. John McCain to the dossier. How this “top secret” source fits into this puzzle could matter deeply.

But what is clear is that we’ve barely scratched the surface of the FBI’s 2016 behavior, and the country will never get the straight story until President Trump moves to declassify everything possible. It’s time to rip off the band-aid.

Jarrett: Our top story, the corrupt DOJ Leaderships is still stonewalling Congress about a potential Bombshell revelation -- the identity of an FBI Mole within the Trump Campaign. House Intelligence Committee members Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy will have to wait until next week to get a direct look at the very documents related to the Russia Probe.
Whether the British counterparts were hoodwinked into playing this role is still unclear. Maybe they were. On the other hand, with most of what they know about the U.S. electorate doubtless coming from the NYT and even more left-wing British media, they may well have done this willingly, believing the globalist Hillary had a sure shot at the presidency and this was a means of cementing a relationship with her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top